Resource

Asylum Aid has welcomed a landmark Upper Tribunal judgment finding that the Home Office acted unlawfully by operating a secret practice for around nine years of granting recognised victims of trafficking only 12 months' Temporary Permission to Stay (Victim of Trafficking) ("VTS leave") in recovery cases where applicants could not provide evidence showing how long their medical treatment would last. The case, brought by Asylum Aid, forced the Home Office to disclose for the first time that the practice existed and had been in operation for such a long time, was communicated only through verbal instructions and was never set out in written guidance.

The Tribunal found that this unpublished practice prevented survivors of trafficking and modern slavery from making informed representations about the length of leave they needed for their recovery. It also found that the Home Office unlawfully treated 12 months' leave as the default, rather than considering each case on the basis of all the available evidence, as required by its published policy.

Shortly after the judgment, the government has introduced a new Immigration and Asylum Bill, which would weaken protections for the vast majority of trafficking survivors.  The Bill would remove the duty to grant leave to remain where this is necessary to support a survivor's recovery. If passed, survivors of trafficking could no longer access this protection, regardless of their recovery needs.

Leave to remain is already granted to only a small minority of recognised trafficking survivors. In 2024, 4,240 people who had been confirmed as victims of trafficking were considered for leave to remain as trafficking victims, but only 176 (4%) received it. Of those, 169 were granted leave to remain to support their recovery and seven to assist with a criminal investigation or prosecution. A total of 4,064 survivors were refused leave to remain. The Bill would remove even this limited protection for most trafficking survivors who need leave to remain in the UK for medical reasons to assist their recovery.

The case was brought by Asylum Aid on behalf of its client, TK, a recognised victim of trafficking who was subjected to forced labour in Syria. As a result of his exploitation, TK lives with severe mental ill health, chronic pain and significant physical injuries. He requires specialist long-term open-ended therapeutic treatment and continues to rely on support to access healthcare services.

Despite the Immigration Rules and published Home Office policy allowing grants of up to 30 months' VTS leave where necessary for a victim's recovery, the Home Office granted TK only 12 months' leave.

During the case, after repeated requests from Asylum Aid for the Home Office to disclose relevant information, the government admitted for the first time that it had been following an unpublished verbal practice of granting only 12 months' leave to survivors whose treatment was open-ended and where there was no evidence of when it would end. The Home Office also accepted that it should have disclosed the existence of this practice much earlier and admitted that they failed to comply with their legal duty of candour, as required in judicial review cases.

The Tribunal also questioned why the Home Office had still not included the practice in its published VTS policy, while accepting that the practice is now set out in the Current Circumstances Questionnaire, which is sent to those being considered for VTS or further VTS leave. Although the Home Office made the practice public in December 2025, the Tribunal confirmed that its previous secret practice was unlawful.

The judgment reinforces the principle that public bodies must publish policies that affect people's rights so they can make informed representations about their cases. As the Home Office's own evidence showed the unpublished practice in question had operated for around nine years, many other recognised victims of trafficking may also have been affected.

Monika Glowacka, solicitor at Asylum Aid, said:

"This judgment is an important victory for fairness, transparency and survivors of trafficking. The Home Office cannot operate secret policies or follow secret practices that directly affect people's rights while denying people the opportunity to make informed representations.

For years, recognised survivors recovering from trafficking were subject to an unpublished practice that limited their leave without their knowledge. The Tribunal has made clear that public authorities must publish policies that affect decision-making so people can participate meaningfully in decisions that profoundly affect their lives.

It is deeply concerning that, instead of responding to this judgment by ensuring survivors receive the leave to remain they need for recovery from trauma, the government has chosen to double down. If passed, the Immigration and Asylum Bill would remove recovery-based leave altogether for many trafficking survivors, taking away the very protection this case was about. Rather than fixing an unlawful system, the government is seeking to legislate away the rights of some of the most vulnerable people in the UK.”

Notes to editors

• TK was represented by Monika Glowacka and Monika Nollet of Asylum Aid, who instructed Emma Fitzsimons of Garden Court Chambers.
• The case also relied on evidence from the Helen Bamber Foundation showing that short grants of VTS leave can disrupt survivors' recovery and make it harder for them to benefit from therapy.
• Clause 39 of the Immigration and Asylum Bill, published on 30th June 2026, amends the basis on which confirmed trafficking victims are granted permission to stay in the UK – removing the duty to grant leave to remain where it is necessary to assist victim’s physical and psychological recovery.