A protest against the Rwanda scheme outside the Royal Courts Of Justice in London in 2022. Photograph: Vuk Valcic/ZUMA Press Wire/REX/ShutterstockA protest against the Rwanda scheme outside the Royal Courts Of Justice in London in 2022. Photograph: Vuk Valcic/ZUMA Press Wire/REX/ShutterstockUK will not have to pay Rwanda £100m over failed asylum scheme, court rulesRwanda had sued UK government over alleged breach of agreement, after scheme scrapped by Labour on first day in office
The UK will not have to pay the Rwandan government millions of pounds over a failed migrant deportation scheme set up by Boris Johnson’s administration, an international court has ruled.
The east African nation had sued the current UK government for more than £100m, claiming it was owed after a breach of an agreement.
But after a three-day hearing at The Hague’s permanent court of arbitration in the Netherlands, judges ruled that the UK was not liable for two years of outstanding costs from the scheme, which was shelved in 2024.
Johnson, then prime minister, sealed a deal in 2022 with Kigali to send to Rwanda all asylum seekers arriving on UK shores after “dangerous or illegal journeys” in small boats or lorries.
But the scheme hit legal and political obstacles from the start, with the UK supreme court eventually ruling it illegal. When Keir Starmer became British prime minister in July 2024, he declared the plan “dead and buried” on his first full day in office, dismissing it as a “gimmick”.
During the case, lawyers representing the UK argued it was “entirely logical” the plan would be scrapped when Labour came into power after the 2024 general election and “simple common sense” that no further payments would be due.
The Hope Hostel in Kigali, Rwanda, where it was planned people would stay after arriving from the UK on deportation flights. Photograph: Victoria Jones/PADuring the two years before the scheme was scrapped, only four people actually went to Rwanda, all voluntarily, according to the current UK government. About £290m has been paid to Rwanda, the UK government website says, but Kigali argued in its pre-hearing submissions to the court that two annual payments of £50m were still outstanding.
According to legal papers, Rwanda asked the court to find the UK in breach of the agreement and demanded it pay all outstanding sums, as well as compensation.
Lawyers for the UK denied it had breached parts of the deal and said: “Rwanda is not entitled to any of the forms of relief it seeks” when asking the court to dismiss the claims.
Earlier this year, Downing Street defended the decision to scrap the previous Tory administration’s plan when it emerged Rwanda was taking the UK to court.
Before the election, the Conservative government had already spent £700m on its policy, under which migrants who arrived in the UK by boat from France would be sent to Kigali in an attempt to deter Channel crossings.
Emmanuel Ugirashebuja, Rwanda’s minister of justice and attorney general, previously told the court the country had incurred “significant costs” preparing for the partnership and the UK had “then sought to walk away from its legal obligations”.
Ugirashebuja, Rwanda's minister of justice, speaking previously at the court. Photograph: Permanent court of arbitration/PAHe also said the UK “did not do Rwanda a courtesy of informing it in advance” that it was scrapping the deal, and that leaders were “left to read about this development in the media”.
In a document setting out Rwanda’s claim, Ugirashebuja asked the court to rule that the UK had breached the agreement and should pay about £100m in two instalments in 2024 and 2025, plus £6m in compensation and interest. Instead of compensation, he said Rwanda would accept a formal apology from the UK for failing to honour parts of the deal.
The arbitration court, set up to settle contractual disputes between nations, rejected by majority a £50m claim for one year and unanimously rejected the same amount for the second.
A UK government spokesperson said: “The UK robustly defended its position, and the tribunal has now ruled in favour of the UK on all grounds.”
The two nations are already in dispute after the UK slashed aid to Rwanda, accusing it of supporting M23 rebels in the neighbouring Democratic Republic of the Congo.
Explore more on these topicsShareReuse this content
