Past trafficking alone does not mean certifying asylum claim was incorrect

This article is available to members only. A great deal of time and effort goes into producing the information on Free Movement. Become a member to get unlimited access to all our articles, as they’re published, and much, much more. Membership starts at £26 a month and you can cancel at any time. By becoming a member of Free Movement, you not only support the hard-work that goes into maintaining the website, but get access to premium features; A man who was recognised as a victim of trafficking but still deported to Albania is unable to return to the UK. In R (on the application of MB) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2026] EWCA Civ 1132 , the Court of Appeal held that the Home Office was entitled to certify his protection and human rights claim as clearly unfounded under section 94 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002. The judgment shows how much a claimant must put forward before a certified claim becomes challengeable, as well as how hard it can be to evidence a risk of re-trafficking years after the event. MB feared for his life in Albania due to gambling debt of £11,000 he was unable to repay. He responded to an advert and agreed to work abroad to repay the debt. The recruiters trafficked him to the UK and forced him to work on a cannabis farm, telling him they would kill him if he did not clear the debt.