Charities and asylum seekers who brought legal bids against Government plans to deport some people to Rwanda are due to find out whether they have been successful.

Challenges were brought against the policy announced by then-home secretary Priti Patel in April, which she described as a “world-first agreement” with the east African nation in a bid to deter migrants from crossing the Channel.

The first deportation flight – due to take off on June 14 – was grounded amid a series of challenges against individual removals and the policy as a whole.

Two judges at the Royal Courts of Justice are now due to give their rulings on the legal bids against the policy.

At a five-day hearing in September, lawyers for several asylum seekers, along with the Public and Commercial Services union (PCS) and charities Care4Calais and Detention Action, argued that the plans are unlawful.

They told judges that Rwanda is an “authoritarian state” that “tortures and murders those it considers to be its opponents”.

The High Court in London also heard the Home Office had been told state agents have “regularly targeted” Rwandan refugees in other countries.

UNHCR – the UN Refugee Agency – intervened in the case, telling the court that Rwanda “lacks irreducible minimum components of an accessible, reliable, fair and efficient asylum system”, and that the policy would lead to a serious risk of breaches of the Refugee Convention.

In October, lawyers for the charity Asylum Aid also challenged the policy, arguing the policy’s procedure is “seriously unfair” and also unlawful.

The policy has also been contested on data protection grounds, with a Sudanese man arguing his personal data has unlawfully been shared with the Rwandan authorities.

Monday’s judgments also come as the charity Christian Aid claims the Home Office failed to take the impact of threats caused by climate change to people in Rwanda into account.

The Home Office has defended the claims, arguing the Rwandan authorities have given “detailed assurances” over the processing of asylum claims and the ongoing treatment of individuals.

These include assurances that people deported to Rwanda will be provided with “adequate accommodation”, food, free medical assistance, education, language and professional development training and “integration programmes”, judges were told.

The Home Secretary has provided a minimum of three years’ funding for each “relocated individual”, and five years’ support for anyone granted refugee status if they stay in Rwanda, lawyers also said.

Barristers for the department later told the court that the agreement between the UK and Rwanda contains “very significant safeguarding elements”.

Lord Justice Lewis and Mr Justice Swift are due to give their judgments at a short hearing in London at 10.30am.