Successful challenge to discriminatory support rates for trafficking survivors

Government reg web

This judicial review challenged the rules which offer a significantly lower level of financial support to victims of trafficking who are pregnant or have children and do not claim asylum, as compared to asylum seekers The Secretary of State for the Home Department has conceded that as of 1st July she will increase subsistence amounts for non-asylum seeking victims of trafficking to bring it in line with those who have claimed asylum. The Claimant is to receive back-payments. The Claimant in this case challenged the scheme for the provision of victims of trafficking who were not claiming asylum on the basis that the support:

  1. Is inadequate to meet the recovery needs of the victims who are pregnant or have children and therefore fails to fulfil the Secretary of State’s obligation to implement a scheme concordant with the objective of the European Convention Against Trafficking;
  2. The different levels of support discriminate against victims of trafficking who are not asylum-seekers or regarded as failed asylum-seekers without objective and reasonable justification; and
  3. The Secretary of State failed to have due regard to the Public Sector Equality Duty in providing no asylum-seeking victims of trafficking adequate support.
Alex Goodman acted for the claimant, instructed by Duncan Lewis. Julia Smyth acted for the Secretary of State. Read more about the case in the Independent.

Download your shortlist

Download All Download icon