The ruling came in a case brought by a 25-year-old Syrian asylum seeker who fled forced military conscription in July 2021, knowing he was likely to be imprisoned and tortured in Syria for refusing to fight. He passed through Libya, where he and other Syrians were abducted by armed men and held captive for a month between August and September 2021. His money and phone were seized, the captives were driven through the desert for 24 hours with no food and little water, and they were told they would not be released until their families paid a ransom of several thousand dollars. He was tied up and beaten, and forced to phone his family while his kidnappers beat him so they could hear screams. He was released after his family paid, crossed the Mediterranean to Italy by boat, and reached the UK on 16 May 2022, where he claimed asylum.
The Home Office rejected his trafficking claim, arguing that because he had not been subjected to forced labour by his kidnappers, his experience did not meet the definition of exploitation in the trafficking rules. The High Court ruled in his favour, and the home secretary, Shabana Mahmood, appealed. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding: "The secretary of state erred in not considering the question of whether kidnapping amounted to exploitation."
Each trafficking claim must still be considered on its own facts, but the ruling could help thousands of potential trafficking victims, not only those who arrive in Britain in the future but also those previously rejected after being kidnapped and held to ransom in Libya. They can now get a fresh referral into the national referral mechanism for a new decision on whether there are reasonable grounds to consider them a victim of trafficking.
The government has pledged to support trafficking victims, yet the exclusion of asylum seekers kidnapped for ransom in Libya has denied many of them the support the judges ruled they may be entitled to. Recent freedom of information data found that of 1,778 asylum seekers confirmed as genuine trafficking victims between July 2024 and July 2025, 89% were forcibly removed from the UK, putting them at risk of being trafficked again.
Jeremy Bloom, a consultant solicitor at Duncan Lewis who represented the Syrian man, welcomed the ruling. "This judgment is a vindication of my client's claim to be a victim of trafficking. The Home Office sought to restrict the definition of exploitation," he said. "We hope that it will also assist other victims of trafficking who have experienced similarly horrendous treatment to gain access to the leave and support that they need to recover from those experiences." He said those individuals may include people whose trafficking claims were refused and who might now be able to ask for a new decision based on the law as set out in the judgment.
Home Office sources said it would not be appropriate to comment on legal proceedings. A Home Office spokesperson said: "We are simplifying and strengthening protection and immigration routes, ensuring they are clear, targeted and focused on their intended purpose, while maintaining fairness and public confidence."