Factual background
Factual background
The applicant is a citizen of Nigeria, born in 1994. He has, on any view, had to endure the most unimaginable suffering through being subjected to two periods of modern slavery, both of which took place against a background of family tragedy and trauma.
The applicant’s first period of modern slavery took place in 2013. The applicant had moved to the United Kingdom on 30 January 2010 with his parents upon his father being posted here as a diplomat. Very sadly, his father died in the summer of 2012 in Nigeria. The applicant’s mother subsequently abandoned him and his siblings, and they were sent to live with a family friend, B. In 2013, the applicant was subjected to domestic servitude by B in circumstances which the CG decision now accepts amounted to modern slavery.
The second period of modern slavery took place in 2020. The applicant was groomed by a “county lines” gang and was forced to engage in the supply of Class A drugs. He was arrested and, on 6 April 2021, was charged with two counts of the possession with intent to supply a Class A drug.
Upon accepting that the applicant was a victim of modern slavery, the Competent Authority referred the applicant’s case to the police. The scope and effect of that referral is a disputed issue in these proceedings, to which I shall return.
The DL policy also required the Secretary of State to consider whether to grant discretionary modern slavery leave (“MS leave”) to the applicant. The applicant made representations to the Secretary of State in support of such a decision by a letter dated 8 September 2022. MS leave was said to be necessary to enable the applicant’s mental health to recover from his trafficking experiences and as a form of restitution. To that end, the applicant relied on a psychological report by Dr Rachel Thomas dated 24 March 2022 (“the Thomas report”). Secondly, it would provide him with the security he needed to defend himself during, and cope generally with, his criminal trial. The applicant also relied on a trafficking report dated 16 May 2022 by Mr Steve Harvey, and made other representations about his private and family life.
- Heading
- Upper Tribunal Judge Stephen Smith
- The issues
- Factual background
- Decision under challenge: the 12 December decision
- Procedural background
- Ground for review
- ECAT and domestic law
- The applicant’s submissions
- The Secretary of State’s submissions
- Issue (1): applicant’s stay not necessary to defend criminal proceedings
- Issue (2): no error on account of the referral of the applicant’s domestic servitude to the police
- Issue 3: no failure to apply anxious scrutiny and applicant’s stay not necessary on account of his mental health conditions
- Article 8 not engaged
- Conclusions
![[2025] UKUT 00092 (IAC)](https://backend.juristeca.com/files/emisores/logo_AioYBzS.png)