He says claims he was forced to work in kitchens and building sites including Lancashire - now he’s won a legal challenge against the Home Office

A Chinese national who says he was beaten, threatened, and underpaid while working in Lancashire has won the right to continue a High Court challenge against a Home Office decision that he was not a victim of human trafficking.

Court documents from a hearing at the High Court in London, on September 18, said that the man, identified as LBZ, is a Chinese national who has been living in the United Kingdom since 2018.

He claims he was exploited while working in kitchens and on construction sites in locations including Lancaster, Manchester, and Edinburgh and claims to have been a victim of trafficking in the United Kingdom.

On October 28, 2025, the Secretary of State found that there were not reasonable grounds to believe that LBZ was a victim of trafficking.

LBZ subsequently brought judicial review proceedings against the Home Office.

His lawyers argued the government had adopted an overly restrictive approach to the definition of trafficking and had failed to properly consider evidence in his case, including material concerning his vulnerability and alleged exploitation.

The Home Office decision letter said: “You stayed in a hotel, and you rented and stayed with people in different cities. You worked in kitchens and construction sites, and you struggled to find enough food, and you had accommodation tied to work. You lived in accommodation provided by the 'bosses' in Lancaster, Manchester and Edinburgh.

"You were physically abused by your boss and other workers. You were beaten and threatened in the past by one of your bosses. Your work colleagues would push you against the wall and tell you that you were not good at your job. You were also hit with an object. You were held by the collar of your clothes and pushed up against a wall.

"You believed that you deserved this and it was your fault as you were not supposed to be in the country. You thought you had to accept whatever treatment you were given. Your boss sometimes would not pay you for the work you did or would pay you less than you were owed.

"While it is clear that you are a vulnerable person and you have some ongoing medical issues, it is considered that you entered into the jobs of your own free will, due to economic necessity, and you were able to leave of your own free will.

"Whilst it is acknowledged that you were treated badly and sometimes not paid or paid less than you were owed, this would constitute a payment dispute which is dissimilar to Modern Slavery.

“You had freedom of movement and it is evident that you left and obtained a number of different jobs since your arrival to the UK.

“Therefore, the situation that you have described cannot be equated to that of Human Trafficking and/or Modern Slavery.”

In a judgment published by the High Court after the September 18 hearing, Mr Justice Sheldon ruled that parts of LBZ's challenge against a decision that he was not a victim of human trafficking can proceed to a full hearing.

The judgment does not determine whether LBZ was a victim of trafficking.

No date has yet been set for a further hearing.