Epping asylum seekers allowed to STAY in migrant hotel as court sparks fury from local residents

The ruling is likely to spark anger among local residents, who have been protesting against the use of the Bell Hotel for illegal migrants.

Lord Justice Cobb said: "The potential cumulative impact of such ad-hoc applications was a material consideration… that was not considered by the judge."

He added: "We grant permission to appeal, both to Somani and to (the Home Office).”

Lord Justice Cobb said that Mr Justice Eyre made an "erroneous” decision not to let the department be involved.

Reading a summary of their decision, Lord Justice Bean said the Home Office had a "constitutional role relating to public safety" and was affected by the issues.

The verdict means that they have been granted permission to be an interested party in the case.

LATEST DEVELOPMENTS:

• Robert Jenrick leads outrage against court decision to allow asylum seekers to stay in Epping hotel
• Ghanaian drug smuggler who was deported three times but sneaked back into Britain allowed to stay
• Katherine Forster delivers verdict on ‘insane' balloon animals and cake lessons for illegal migrants

This means their previously dismissed argument, made earlier this month, will be heard in court and taken into consideration, potentially changing the outcome of the case.

Three senior judges overturned the temporary injunction, which was set to block the 138 asylum seekers from being housed there beyond September 12.

Labour has vowed to end the use of hotels for housing asylum seekers, but has been under pressure to close them earlier after a string of anti-migrant protests.

Reading a summary of the ruling, Lord Justice Bean, sitting with Lady Justice Nicola Davies and Lord Justice Cobb, said: "We should say at the outset what this appeal is not about."

He added: "It is not concerned with the merits of government policy in relation to the provision of accommodation for asylum seekers in hotels or otherwise.”

Justice Cobb said: “We conclude that the judge made a number of errors in principle, which undermine this decision."

He continued: "The judge’s approach ignores the obvious consequence that the closure of one site means capacity needs to be identified elsewhere in the system."

When delivering the verdict, he added that such an injunction "may incentivise" other councils to take similar steps as Epping Forest District Council.

Following the Court of Appeal’s ruling, Borders Minister Dame Andrea Eagle said: “We inherited a chaotic asylum accommodation system costing billions.

"This Government will close all hotels by the end of this Parliament and we appealed this judgment so hotels like the Bell can be exited in a controlled and orderly way that avoids the chaos of recent years that saw 400 hotels open at a cost of £9million a day.

“The number of hotels has almost halved since its peak in 2023 and we have brought down costs by 15 per cent saving £700million and putting us on track to save a billion pounds a year by 2028/29.

“We are also working hard to relieve pressure on the system and striking back at criminal people smuggling gangs at every stage, including returning more than 35,000 people who have no right to be here, equipping law enforcement with counter-terror style powers and starting to detain small boat arrivals under our groundbreaking deal with France.

“It will take some time to fix the broken system we inherited, but the British public deserve nothing less, and we will not stop until the job is done.”

Lisa Foster of Richard Buxton Solicitors, which represents Somani Hotels, added: “We are pleased that the Court of Appeal has ruled that the injunction should not have been granted by the High Court.

"Our clients realise that they have been caught in the middle of a much wider debate on the treatment of asylum seekers and respectfully ask that members of the public understand that the Bell Hotel has simply been providing a contracted service that the Government requires.

"We now ask that all associated with the Bell Hotel are left alone to continue to support the Government’s asylum plans as best they can. We are grateful to the Court of Appeal for appreciating the urgency of the matter from everyone’s point of view and dealing with the matter so swiftly.

"We have no further comment and will not be commenting on the matter again."

A councillor for Epping said the “battle is not over” after the Court of Appeal ruling.

Speaking outside the court, councillor Ken Williamson, member of Epping Forest District Council cabinet, said: “We are deeply disappointed by the outcome of today’s hearing.

“While Epping Forest has brought the wider asylum seeker debate into sharp national focus, the concern and motivation of Epping Forest District Council throughout has been the wellbeing of our local residents, where we had clarity and resolution, we now have doubt and confusion.”

He added: “The battle is not over and we will continue the fight.”

The council could still be granted an injunction following a full hearing of the legal claim, which is due to be heard in October.

Both police and members of the public have been seen outside the hotel as authorities brace for further protests.

However, the ruling will come as a relief to the Home Office, as councils across Britain were reportedly looking into using the injunction as a precedent to launch their own legal challenges.

Shadow Justice Secretary Robert Jenrick has called the decision to allow asylum seekers to stay at an Epping migrant hotel "an extremely disappointing decision".

Mr Jenrick said: "Yvette Cooper used taxpayer money - your money - to keep open a hotel housing illegal migrants. The Government's lawyers argued accommodating illegal migrants was in the 'national interest'.

"Well, they are not. The British Government should always put the interests of the British people first. Starmer's Government has shown itself to be on the side of illegal migrants who have broken into our country."

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has echoed her Conservative colleague's concerns, saying: "Local communities should not pay the price for Labour's total failure on illegal immigration.

"Keir Starmer has shown that he puts the rights of illegal immigrants above the rights of British people who just want to feel safe in their towns and communities.

She added: "This ruling is a setback, but it is not the end. I say to Conservative councils seeking similar injunctions against asylum hotels - KEEP GOING!"

Reform UK leader Nigel Farage also said: "The Government has used ECHR against the people of Epping.

"Illegal migrants have more rights than the British people under Starmer."