Research and analysis

Issues raised by people facing return in immigration detention

Updated 19 July 2021

1. About immigration detention

This report contains data on individuals detained in the Home Office detention estate and HM Prisons solely under Immigration Act powers. The detention estate comprises immigration removal centres (IRC) and short-term holding facilities (STHF).

The statistics in this report show the number of people leaving detention per year having been held solely under immigration powers. The statistics will include some individuals imprisoned in the UK following a criminal sentence, but only if subsequently detained under immigration powers. Some individuals may leave detention more than once in a year, and the statistics will include these people more than once.

This publication splits people in detention into three groups:^{[footnote 1]}

People detained within the UK following immigration offences: This includes (i) people who have overstayed their leave to remain in the UK; (ii) people who have breached the terms of their leave to remain (e.g. by working illegally); (iii) people who entered the country irregularly and are being returned to their home country or a safe third country; and (iv) people whose leave to remain has been curtailed.

Foreign national offenders (FNOs) in detention: This includes (i) FNOs transferred directly from prison to detention for return after completing a prison sentence; (ii) FNOs re-detained for return following release on bail; and (iii) people detained from the community for return following conviction for a crime overseas and considered a threat to the public.

People detained on arrival in the UK: This includes (i) people detained while attempting to enter the UK through a regular port of entry; and (ii) those apprehended attempting to enter the UK irregularly (or immediately after entering). These people were generally detained only for a short time (most for three days or less), and any issues raised by these people were generally being raised at the first opportunity in the UK. Therefore, this analysis does not include this group.

For complete statistics on the number of entries, exits, and people in detention, please refer to the chapter on ‘How many people are detained or returned?’ in the immigration statistics quarterly release.

2. About the issues raised by people in detention

Many legal avenues are available for people to regularise their stay and challenge prior decisions, and to protect those who are vulnerable. People can raise these issues when entering the UK, while living in the community, or while in prison or detention.

If raised in detention, these issues may be considered while the individual remains in detention (and, if appropriate, removal action may follow), but in most instances the person is released for the issue to be considered outside of detention.

This analysis looks at eight legal avenues through which a person can seek to remain in the UK, or challenge the decision to remove or detain them:

• applying for asylum
• applying for leave to remain on human rights or other rights-based grounds
• a fresh application for leave to remain on protection or human rights grounds following an earlier refused asylum or human rights claim (known as ‘further submissions’)
• appealing against an immigration decision, such as a refusal for further leave to remain, an asylum decision, or a decision to deport
• lodging a judicial review
• being referred as a potential victim of modern slavery through the National Referral Mechanism (NRM)
• being the subject of a medical report under Rule 35 of the Detention Centre Rules 2001,^{[footnote 2]} which can then lead to the consideration of ‘further submissions’
• being the subject of a medico-legal report (MLR) from a medical practitioner independent from the Home Office

The analysis includes one further issue for which there is no legal basis:

• Being physically disruptive or not cooperating during the removal process, such that removal fails.

These issues are relatively common within detention, and data are available, but this list is not exhaustive of the issues that can be raised (legal or not). Other issues are excluded due to a lack of reliable data, such as where a person in detention has not complied with efforts to obtain travel documentation for them.

This report also includes statistics on the outcomes of the issues raised in detention that could allow the person to remain in the UK (such as whether an asylum application was granted). However, in many cases a decision is still pending, especially for people who left detention recently.

3. About the data

All statistics in this report are taken from internal management information.

The data show the prevalence with which each issue was raised in detention. However, trends in prevalence should be interpreted with caution. Many factors may cause an increase, including (i) an increase in detentions of people with a genuine basis for raising that issue; (ii) increased awareness of that issue among people in detention and their representatives; or (iii) a change in the perceived likelihood of achieving one’s aims through one means rather than another.

Reasons for release can be complicated and may involve multiple factors. As a result, we cannot say that someone raised an issue and was released as a consequence, only that they raised the issue and were subsequently released.

These statistics only look at individual periods of detention. Released people may have been re-detained and returned later.

The statistics include outcomes of the issues raised where possible. However, a negative outcome does not mean that the issue was raised spuriously. The individual may have genuinely believed that their application was well-founded, but the relevant decision-making body disagreed with their claim. It is impossible to understand the person’s motivations purely from the statistics. Similarly, an issue raised by an individual does not mean that the claim was well-founded.

The statistics only include outcomes that happened before the end of September 2020. Any decisions made after this date are recorded as ‘ongoing’.

Further statistics on detention and returns, and on asylum claims, are available in the immigration statistics quarterly release. Further statistics on immigration appeals are available in the tribunal statistics quarterly release, published by the Ministry of Justice. The Single Competent Authority publishes further statistics on referrals for potential victims of modern slavery.

4. Key points

In 2019, around 24,500 people left immigration detention^{[footnote 3]}, of whom 11,367 people were detained within the UK (rather than on entry) following immigration offences. A further 5,921 were detained following a criminal conviction, and 7,316 detained on arrival in the UK.

4.1 People detained within the UK following immigration offences

Of the 11,367 people who left detention in 2019 having been detained within the UK following immigration offences, 2,524 were returned and 8,843 were released (though some may have subsequently been re-detained and returned, or left the UK voluntarily). The number of people leaving detention in 2019 was 27% lower than in 2017, and the proportion of detainees returned has fallen from 38% in 2017 to 22% in 2019.

Most people were detained for 28 days or less (69% of those who left detention in 2019), 89% for less than 2 months, and over 99.5% for less than 6 months. Only one individual was held for more than a year – a foreign national offender who had returned to the UK in breach of a deportation order and so was detained for removal on the basis of an immigration offence.

Most people detained following immigration offences were recorded as having raised one or more of the issues in detention (73% in 2019), with the majority (94%) subsequently released. Over a third of people (35%) reported a single issue, but nearly two in five (39%) detentions involved two or more of the featured issues.

Looking just at the issues involving an application or legal challenge, more than half of people (57%) detained following immigration offences in 2017 raised an asylum claim, rights-based application, further submission, appeal or judicial review, and this rose to 58% in 2019 and 64% in 2019. Of the issues raised in 2019, 95% were followed by release from detention.

Asylum applications were the most common issue raised by people detained following immigration offences (during 47% of detentions) and were almost always followed by release (97%). The proportion of people claiming asylum in detention has risen from less than a third (32%) to almost half (47%) in the last two years. The number of such claims has risen slightly less, from 5,084 instances to 5,302.

Between 2017 and 2019, there has also been a rise in the proportion of people in this group who, while in immigration detention, were:

• referred as a potential victim of modern slavery (from 3% to 16%)
• the subject of a MLR (from less than 1% to 19%, a rise from fewer than 50 instances in 2017 to over 2,000 in 2019) - this may have been a delayed consequence of introducing and publishing the ‘adults at risk in immigration detention’ policy in 2016, which gives substantial weight to professional evidence stating that an individual is at risk and continued detention would be likely to cause harm

At the same time there has been a decrease in the proportion of detentions during which the person:

• applied on human rights or other right-based grounds (from 10% to 5%)
• lodged an appeal (from 6% to 3%)
• lodged a judicial review (from 20% to 9%)
• caused a return attempt to fail due to physical disruption (from 13% to 5%).

Despite the differing trends, the combined prevalence of these issues has increased. In 2019, people raised one or more of these issues during 73% of detentions, compared to 67% in 2018 and 63% in 2017.

Where none of these issues were raised, detention generally ended with the person being returned to another country (67%), and most of these people returned within 28 days of entering detention (88%). Conversely, detention almost always ended in release where one or more of these issues were raised (only 6% returned), and those who were returned generally spent over 28 days in detention (26% of returns were within 28 days).

Where these issues were raised, return rates were higher following physical disruption (25% returned during the same period of detention), and lowest where the person was referred as a potential victim of modern slavery (1% returned, and only after a negative ‘reasonable grounds’ decision was made while the person was still in detention).

Analysis of the outcomes of these issues is complicated because many are yet to receive a decision. Applications and referrals may raise complex factors, or the decisions may be subject to criminal or other legal proceedings, and therefore sometimes it can take many months, or even years, to reach a decision. However, the decision-making body did not agree with the claim in most instances. Looking back at issues raised during detentions ending in 2017 for immigration offenders from the community, 12% resulted in a positive decision for the individual or some form of concession being made, 83% did not result in a positive decision, and 5% are ongoing. This excludes Rule 35 reports and MLRs, as they are not challenging the decision to remove the individual from the UK but are instead providing medical advice in relation to detention of the individual which would require consideration under the Adults at Risk policy. The analysis also excludes physical disruption, as no decision is being made.

Looking at each issue separately for people detained following immigration offences from the community:

• of the asylum claims made by people leaving detention in 2017, 4% were granted leave to remain at the initial decision, 91% were not granted and 5% are ongoing (a further 7% were allowed on appeal and 2% are awaiting an appeal outcome)
• for human rights and other rights-based applications, and further submissions, less than 5% of each were granted for people who left detention in 2017, and over 90% were not granted
• for appeals lodged by people who left detention in 2017, 18% were allowed, 81% were not allowed and 1% are ongoing
• for judicial reviews lodged by people who left detention in 2017, less than 1% were allowed (but the Home Office settled a further 19% without the full judicial review claim being considered by a judge), 74% were refused permission or dismissed, and 6% were closed by the court for procedural reasons
• for modern slavery referrals regarding people who left detention in 2017, 58% received a positive decision at the initial ‘reasonable grounds’ assessment,^{[footnote 4]} and 16% have also received a positive decision at the second ‘conclusive grounds’ stage, with 19% awaiting this second-stage decision (most referrals regarding people who left detention in 2019 are still awaiting a ‘conclusive grounds’ decision, but 90% received a positive decision at the ‘reasonable grounds’ assessment)

4.2 Foreign national offenders (FNOs) in detention

In 2019, 5,921 FNOs left detention. Of these, 3,805 (64%) were returned and 2,116 (36%) were released (though some may have subsequently been re-detained and returned, or left the UK voluntarily). Note: this is not a complete picture of FNO returns as some individuals were removed directly from custody rather than from immigration detention, and some were removed for immigration offences rather than criminal offences where the criminal offence did not warrant deportation (and so are included in the previous section). See the published immigration statistics (Returns summary tables – table Ret_02) for a complete count of FNO returns.

One or more of the featured issues were raised in around one in four detentions (24% in 2019), and mostly the individual was subsequently released from detention. Overall, the prevalence of these issues has been broadly consistent over the three years, but the proportion returned where one or more issues were raised has declined from 36% in 2017 to 25% in 2019.

Note: these statistics only look at issues raised while the individual was in immigration detention. Any issues raised prior to detention (such as appeals made while the person was serving a prison sentence) are not counted here, unless the issue was raised again in detention.

For FNOs who left detention in 2019, the most common issue raised was an appeal (536 instances, 9% of detentions). Rule 35 reports featured in 8% of detentions (458 instances), judicial reviews in 7% of detentions (397 instances), and asylum claims were made in 6% of detentions (335 instances).

Analysis of the outcomes is complicated because many are yet to receive a decision. Applications and referrals may raise complex factors, or the decisions may be subject to criminal or other legal proceedings, and therefore sometimes it can take many months, or even years, to reach a decision. Looking back at issues raised during detentions ending in 2017, 21% resulted in a positive decision for the individual or some form of concession being made, 75% did not result in a positive decision and 4% are ongoing. As in the previous section, this calculation excludes Rule 35 reports, MLRs and physical disruption.

Looking at each issue separately:

• most FNOs who left detention in 2017, having claimed asylum while in immigration detention, did not have their claim upheld - only 2% of asylum applicants were granted leave to remain at the initial decision, whereas 92% were not and 5% are awaiting a decision (a further 3% were allowed on appeal and 3% are awaiting an appeal outcome)
• no human rights or other rights-based applications raised by FNOs during detentions ending in 2017 were granted
• five percent of further submissions raised by FNOs during detentions ending in 2017 resulted in a grant
• for appeals lodged by FNOs who left detention in 2017, 24% were allowed, 72% were dismissed and 4% are ongoing
• for judicial reviews raised during FNO detentions that ended in 2017, just 1% were allowed, 28% were settled, 61% were refused permission or dismissed and 9% were closed by the court for procedural reasons
• for modern slavery referrals regarding FNOs who left detention in 2017, 64% received a positive decision at the initial ‘reasonable grounds’ assessment, and 25% have also received a positive decision at the second ‘conclusive grounds’ stage, with 10% awaiting this final decision

5. Data tables

Table 1: Number of detention exits, by year

	2017	2018	2019
People detained within the UK following immigration offences	15,674	13,179	11,367
Foreign national offenders in detention	6,636	6,395	5,921
People detained on arrival in the UK	6,036	5,938	7,316
Total	28,346	25,512	24,604

Note: The figures in this report are taken from a live operational database and so may differ slightly from the published immigration statistics.

Table 2a: Number (and proportion) of detentions in which each issue was raised, by year, for people detained within the UK following immigration offences

Issue raised	2017	2018	2019
Asylum claim	5,084 (32%)	4,850 (37%)	5,302 (47%)
Rights-based application	1,520 (10%)	1,034 (8%)	519 (5%)
Further submissions	2,072 (13%)	1,809 (14%)	1,435 (13%)
Appeal	914 (6%)	678 (5%)	293 (3%)
Judicial review	3,170 (20%)	2,009 (15%)	1,009 (9%)
NRM referral	501 (3%)	718 (5%)	1,767 (16%)
Rule 35 report	1,936 (12%)	1,923 (15%)	1,559 (14%)
Medico-legal report	48 (0%)	1,154 (9%)	2,208 (19%)
Disrupted return	2,000 (13%)	1,609 (12%)	558 (5%)
Any of the above	9,849 (63%)	8,771 (67%)	8,351 (73%)
None of the above	5,825 (37%)	4,408 (33%)	3,016 (27%)

Note: An individual may raise more than one issue. People who raised multiple issues of different types are counted in multiple rows. People who raised multiple issues of the same type are only counted once in that row.

Table 2b: Number (and proportion) of detentions in which each issue was raised, by year, for foreign national offenders

Issue raised	2017	2018	2019
Asylum claim	328 (5%)	282 (4%)	335 (6%)
Rights-based application	54 (1%)	40 (1%)	17 (0%)
Further submissions	132 (2%)	106 (2%)	115 (2%)
Appeal	690 (10%)	805 (13%)	536 (9%)
Judicial review	666 (10%)	494 (8%)	397 (7%)
NRM referral	89 (1%)	79 (1%)	182 (3%)
Rule 35 report	421 (6%)	386 (6%)	458 (8%)
Medico-legal report	3 (0%)	20 (0%)	107 (2%)
Disrupted return	333 (5%)	277 (4%)	219 (4%)
Any of the above	1,800 (27%)	1,644 (26%)	1,442 (24%)
None of the above	4,836 (73%)	4,751 (74%)	4,479 (76%)

Note: An individual may raise more than one issue. People who raised multiple issues of different types are counted in multiple rows. People who raised multiple issues of the same type are only counted once in that row.

Table 3a: Number of different issues raised during each detention, by year, for people detained within the UK following immigration offences

Number of different issues raised	2017	2018	2019
None	5,825 (37%)	4,408 (33%)	3,016 (27%)
One	5,318 (34%)	4,554 (35%)	3,945 (35%)
Two	2,622 (17%)	2,377 (18%)	3,015 (27%)
Three	1,225 (8%)	1,157 (9%)	1,007 (9%)
Four	470 (3%)	480 (4%)	296 (3%)
Five or more	214 (1%)	203 (2%)	88 (1%)

Table 3b: Number of different issues raised during each detention, by year, for foreign national offenders

Number of different issues raised	2017	2018	2019
None	4,836 (73%)	4,751 (74%)	4,479 (76%)
One	1,174 (18%)	1,070 (17%)	847 (14%)
Two	413 (6%)	373 (6%)	368 (6%)
Three	154 (2%)	146 (2%)	151 (3%)
Four	42 (1%)	45 (1%)	54 (1%)
Five or more	17 (0%)	10 (0%)	22 (0%)

Table 4a: Number (and proportion) of detentions that resulted in return where each issue was raised, by year, for people detained within the UK following immigration offences

Issue raised	2017	2018	2019
Asylum claim	775 (15%)	502 (10%)	175 (3%)
Rights-based application	296 (19%)	149 (14%)	35 (7%)
Further submissions	622 (30%)	425 (23%)	161 (11%)
Appeal	205 (22%)	119 (18%)	15 (5%)
Judicial review	645 (20%)	327 (16%)	81 (8%)
NRM referral	67 (13%)	70 (10%)	20 (1%)
Rule 35 report	423 (22%)	286 (15%)	128 (8%)
Medico-legal report	8 (17%)	45 (4%)	48 (2%)
Disrupted return	758 (38%)	426 (26%)	142 (25%)
Any of the above	1,995 (20%)	1,283 (15%)	510 (6%)
None of the above	3,898 (67%)	2,942 (67%)	2,014 (67%)

Table 4b: Number (and proportion) of detentions that resulted in return where each issue was raised, by year, for foreign national offenders

Issue raised	2017	2018	2019
Asylum claim	78 (24%)	56 (20%)	52 (16%)
Rights-based application	16 (30%)	6 (15%)	3 (18%)
Further submissions	40 (30%)	31 (29%)	31 (27%)
Appeal	254 (37%)	266 (33%)	158 (29%)
Judicial review	194 (29%)	134 (27%)	73 (18%)
NRM referral	8 (9%)	5 (6%)	11 (6%)
Rule 35 report	89 (21%)	64 (17%)	71 (16%)
Medico-legal report	0 (0%)	1 (5%)	15 (14%)
Disrupted return	247 (74%)	187 (68%)	124 (57%)
Any of the above	651 (36%)	535 (33%)	367 (25%)
None of the above	3,663 (76%)	3,508 (74%)	3,438 (77%)

Table 5a: Length of detention by outcome, for detentions ending in 2019, for people detained within the UK following immigration offences

Days in detention	None of the listed issues raised - Returned	None of the listed issues raised - Released	One or more issue raised - Returned	One or more issue raised - Released
3 days or less	33	301	0	281
4 to 7 days	98	148	13	672
8 to 14 days	1,001	208	24	1,884
15 to 28 days	636	196	97	2,242
29 days to less than 2 months	202	119	196	1,809
2 months to less than 3 months	30	20	88	565
3 months to less than 4 months	9	6	45	219
4 months to less than 6 months	5	4	33	131
6 months to less than 12 months	0	0	13	38
12 months to less than 18 months	0	0	1	0
18 months to less than 24 months	0	0	0	0
24 months to less than 36 months	0	0	0	0
36 months to less than 48 months	0	0	0	0
Total	2,014	1,002	510	7,841

Table 5b: Length of detention by outcome, for detentions ending in 2019, for foreign national offenders

Days in detention	None of the listed issues raised - Returned	None of the listed issues raised - Released	One or more issue raised - Returned	One or more issue raised - Released
3 days or less	1,769	88	3	21
4 to 7 days	183	84	5	22
8 to 14 days	232	143	15	40
15 to 28 days	450	231	27	106
29 days to less than 2 months	478	192	64	232
2 months to less than 3 months	174	115	68	129
3 months to less than 4 months	66	63	51	132
4 months to less than 6 months	39	54	48	133
6 months to less than 12 months	36	61	55	184
12 months to less than 18 months	9	9	24	55
18 months to less than 24 months	2	0	5	17
24 months to less than 36 months	0	1	2	4
36 months to less than 48 months	0	0	0	0
Total	3,438	1,041	367	1,075

Table 6a: Outcomes of asylum applications made in detention, by year

		People detained following immigration offences - 2017	People detained following immigration offences - 2018	People detained following immigration offences - 2019	Foreign national offenders in detention - 2017	Foreign national offenders in detention - 2018	Foreign national offenders in detention - 2019
Applications		5,084	4,850	5,302	328	282	335
Initial decisions	Granted[footnote 5]	222	181	131	8	5	4
	Not granted	4,610	3,779	2,120	302	224	195
	Ongoing	252	890	3,051	18	53	136
Appeal outcomes (for those not granted at the initial decision)	No appeal lodged	2,867	2,441	1,535	236	167	159
	Allowed	366	211	61	11	13	3
	Not allowed	1,271	967	318	45	36	20
	Ongoing	106	160	206	10	8	13

Table 6b: Outcomes of human rights and other rights-based applications made in detention, by year

	People detained following immigration offences - 2017	People detained following immigration offences - 2018	People detained following immigration offences - 2019	Foreign national offenders in detention - 2017	Foreign national offenders in detention - 2018	Foreign national offenders in detention - 2019
Applications	1,520	1,034	519	54	40	17
of which, granted	60	39	18	0	0	0
of which, not granted	1,378	895	360	51	32	16
of which, ongoing	82	100	141	3	8	1

Table 6c: Outcomes of further submissions^{[footnote 6]} from detention, by year

	People detained following immigration offences - 2017	People detained following immigration offences - 2018	People detained following immigration offences - 2019	Foreign national offenders in detention - 2017	Foreign national offenders in detention - 2018	Foreign national offenders in detention - 2019
Applications	2,072	1,809	1,435	132	106	115
of which, granted	50	44	23	7	6	10
of which, not granted	1,889	1,438	954	112	86	75
of which, ongoing	133	327	458	13	14	30

Table 6d: Outcomes of appeals lodged in detention, by year^{[footnote 7]}

	People detained following immigration offences - 2017	People detained following immigration offences - 2018	People detained following immigration offences - 2019	Foreign national offenders in detention - 2017	Foreign national offenders in detention - 2018	Foreign national offenders in detention - 2019
Lodged	914	678	293	690	805	536
of which, allowed	164	110	49	167	201	95
of which, not allowed	739	552	209	497	540	322
of which, ongoing	11	16	35	26	64	119

Table 6e: Outcomes of judicial reviews lodged in detention, by year^{[footnote 7]}

	People detained following immigration offences - 2017	People detained following immigration offences - 2018	People detained following immigration offences - 2019	Foreign national offenders in detention - 2017	Foreign national offenders in detention - 2018	Foreign national offenders in detention - 2019
Lodged	3,170	2,009	1,009	666	494	397
of which, allowed	16	7	1	7	4	4
of which, refused permission or dismissed	2,334	1,500	748	406	280	219
of which, settled[footnote 8]	602	389	187	184	164	130
of which, other[footnote 9]	181	60	20	57	28	12
of which, unclear[footnote 10]	20	33	19	8	9	1
of which, ongoing	17	20	34	4	9	31

Table 6f: Outcomes of modern slavery referrals made in detention, by year

		People detained following immigration offences - 2017	People detained following immigration offences - 2018	People detained following immigration offences - 2019	Foreign national offenders in detention - 2017	Foreign national offenders in detention - 2018	Foreign national offenders in detention - 2019
Referrals		501	718	1,767	89	79	182
Reasonable grounds decision[footnote 11]	Positive	293	478	1,599	57	61	133
	Negative	204	239	160	29	18	45
	Other	4	1	6	3	0	4
	Ongoing	0	0	2[footnote 12]	0	0	0
Conclusive grounds decision[footnote 13] (of those with a positive reasonable grounds decision)	Positive	79	53	34	22	25	13
	Negative	63	25	18	18	6	6
	Other[footnote 14]	56	53	30	8	13	10
	Ongoing	95	347	1,517	9	17	104

Outcomes of Rule 35 reports, and medico-legal reports Rule 35 reports and MLRs are not challenging the decision to remove the individual from the UK, but are instead providing medical advice in relation to detention of the individual which would require consideration under the Adults at Risk policy. As a result, they do not have an ‘outcome’ in the same sense as the preceding issues, so no statistics on outcomes are included.

Outcomes of return attempts that failed due to disruption Physical disruption does not have an ‘outcome’ other than causing the removal attempt to fail. Therefore, no statistics on outcomes are included.

1. In terms of Home Office operations, these groups comprise: (i) individuals detained by Immigration Enforcement’s National Returns Command (including detained asylum and detained third country returns); (ii) individuals detained by Criminal Casework, including those detained under Operation Nexus; and (iii) individuals detained by Border Force, and UK Visas and Immigration’s (UKVI) National Asylum Intake Unit. ↩

2. Rule 35 relates to the responsibility of doctors in IRCs to report to Home Office caseworkers where there is (i) the likelihood of a detainee’s health being injuriously affected by continued detention; (ii) a suspicion that a detained person has suicidal intentions; or (iii) concern that a detained person may have been a victim of torture. ↩

3. https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/immigration-statistics-year-ending-june-2020/how-many-people-are-detained-or-returned#data-tables, Immigration detention summary tables – table Det_D03 ↩

4. The NRM for potential victims of modern slavery uses a two-stage assessment process. Firstly, a ‘reasonable grounds’ decision is made by the Single Competent Authority (SCA) as to whether the decision-maker suspects but cannot prove that the individual being considered is a victim of modern slavery. If the decision is positive, then the referral is investigated further and a second ‘conclusive grounds’ decision is taken as to whether, on the balance of probabilities, there are sufficient grounds to decide that the individual being considered is a victim of modern slavery. ↩

5. Includes grants of asylum, discretionary leave, and humanitarian protection. ↩

6. People can make multiple further submissions while in detention, and may have multiple outcomes on a given application (e.g. if they appealed). The figures given here relate to the first outcome on the last further submissions raised during that period of detention. ↩

7. Data on appeal and judicial review outcomes are taken from Home Office systems and may differ from statistics reported by HMCTS due to different practices for recording data between departments. ↩ ↩²

8. Claims where the parties have reached an agreement to settle the proceedings without a judge considering the full judicial review claim. Cases may have been settled either before or after a judge granted permission to proceed to a full hearing, on the papers or at an Oral Permission Hearing. ↩

9. Claims which have been closed by the courts for procedural reasons. ↩

10. Claims where the outcome of the proceedings is unclear from the Home Office management system. ↩

11. ‘Reasonable grounds decision’ is a decision taken by the SCA as to whether the decision-maker suspects but cannot prove that the individual being considered is a victim of modern slavery (human trafficking or slavery, servitude, or forced or compulsory labour) ↩

12. Cases ongoing as of 30 September 2020 due to safeguarding reasons ↩

13. ‘Conclusive grounds decision’ is a decision taken by the SCA as to whether, on the balance of probabilities, there are sufficient grounds to decide that the individual being considered is a victim of modern slavery (human trafficking or slavery, servitude, or forced or compulsory labour). ↩

14. ‘Other’ outcomes include referrals where the decision has been suspended because the subject has gone missing and there is insufficient evidence to reach the appropriate standard of proof, as well as where the subject has withdrawn from the process. ↩