A High Court judge has ruled that asylum seekers can continue to be accommodated at the Bell Hotel in Epping, Essex, dealing a significant blow to the local council's legal efforts to stop the practice.
Legal Battle and Court Ruling
The legal dispute centred on claims by Epping Forest District Council that the hotel's owner, Somani Hotels, was breaching planning permissions by housing asylum seekers. The council argued this constituted a 'material change of use' for the property.
However, in a ruling delivered today, Justice Mould dismissed the council's claim, stating it was ‘not an appropriate means of enforcing planning control’. The judge's decision upholds the position of Somani Hotels, which contended that providing accommodation for asylum seekers did not fundamentally alter the hotel's use.
The Home Office intervened in the case, which has become a focal point in the UK's polarising national debate on immigration.
Background of Protests and Previous Injunctions
The Bell Hotel became the epicentre of heated and sometimes violent protests during the summer. The unrest was triggered after an asylum seeker residing at the hotel, Hadush Gerberslasie Kebatu, an Ethiopian national, was charged with sexually assaulting a teenage girl. Kebatu was jailed for a year in September before being mistakenly freed and subsequently placed back behind bars.
Far-right groups descended on Epping for weeks, resulting in clashes with police and 23 arrests. In response to the tensions, a judge had previously granted the council a temporary injunction that would have prevented 138 asylum seekers from being housed at the hotel beyond September.
This injunction was overturned by the Court of Appeal in August, which ruled it was ‘seriously flawed in principle’ and stated that hotel bosses did not require specific planning permission for this use.
Broader Implications and National Context
The government has a legal obligation to provide accommodation for asylum applicants who would otherwise be destitute and who are largely prevented from working while their claims are processed. This has led to a significant reliance on hotel accommodation across the country.
Currently, around 200 hotels are being used to house approximately 32,000 asylum seekers, a system initially intended for emergency use only. Asylum seekers remain in this accommodation until officials determine the validity of their claims.
It was revealed that the Bell Hotel had previously housed asylum seekers from May 2020 to March 2021 and again from October 2022 to April 2024, during which time the council took no legal action.
The outcome of this case is being closely watched by other local authorities, with some, particularly those led by Reform UK councillors, considering similar moves to block hotel owners from accommodating asylum seekers.
Enver Solomon, chief executive of the Refugee Council, commented on the ruling, stating that while the government won this legal battle, the threat of hotel closures remains. He criticised alternative government plans, saying, ‘Plans to warehouse people in military barracks or other large sites are not a viable or humane solution. They are unsuitable, isolating, and the government’s own spending watchdog has found them to be more expensive than hotels.’
Solomon added that hotels are not a long-term solution, describing them as ‘flashpoints for community division’ that cost taxpayers billions and leave vulnerable people in a state of limbo.
