Asylum seekers to stay at Bell Hotel in Epping after government wins appeal

Although the Home Office won its court case, the political fallout for the government could be dire, ITV News Political Correspondent Shehab Khan reports

Asylum seekers will be allowed to remain living at the Bell Hotel in Epping, after the government won an appeal against a ruling ordering their removal.

Three senior judges ruled on Friday that the temporary injunction requiring the 138 asylum seekers to be removed from the site by September 12 can be set aside, and errors by the judge "undermine his decision."

In response to the ruling, a small number of protesters gathered outside the hotel on Friday night, with police putting in a dispersal order from 9.30pm.

The protesters waved England and Union flags as police guarded the entrance.

The police's Section 60AA order will be in place for 24 hours and gives them the power to ask anyone to remove an item such as a face mask which is being used to conceal their identity.

There was also a protest reported in nearby Cheshunt on Friday night outside the Delta Marriott hotel, which has also been used to house asylum seekers.

Lord Justice Bean, one of the justices who made the ruling on Friday, criticised Mr Justice Eyre's previous decision to ban the Bell Hotel from being used to house asylum seekers.

From Westminster to Washington DC - our political experts are across all the latest key talking points. Listen to the latest episode below...

He warned “this runs the risk of acting as an impetus or incentive for further protests.”

“At its worst, if even unlawful protests are to be treated as relevant, there is a risk of encouraging further lawlessness.

“The judge does not appear to have considered this risk,” he told the court.

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

The judges also said that the decision to block the Home Office's bid to intervene in the case was “erroneous”.

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.

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.”

He added that such an injunction “may incentivise” other councils to take similar steps as Epping Forest District Council.

Subscribe free to our weekly newsletter for exclusive and original coverage from ITV News. Direct to your inbox every Friday morning.

Responding to the decision, Home Office minister Dame Angela Eagle said: "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 £9m a day."

“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," she insisted.

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.”

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch claimed Sir Keir Starmer “puts the rights of illegal immigrants above the rights of British people”.

In a statement posted on X, she urged Conservative councillors seeking similar injunctions to “KEEP GOING!” despite the ruling.

Her statement read: “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."

Meanwhile Reform UK leader Nigel Farage posted on X saying "the government has used ECHR (European Convention on Human Rights) against the people of Epping."Illegal migrants have more rights than the British people under Starmer," he wrote.

Reacting to the overturning of the injunction, Refugee Council chief executive Enver Solomon said while the government was successful in its appeal, the reality of using hotels to house asylum seekers is “untenable”.

He said: “Waiting until 2029 to end their use is no longer an option.

“As long as hotels remain open, they will continue to be flashpoints for protests, fuelling division and leaving people who have fled war and persecution feeling unsafe.

“Through our frontline work we see how refugees housed in neighbourhoods, rather than isolated in hotels, are able to rebuild their lives, enter training or work, and contribute to the local economy.”

The Home Office had launched a bid, along with the owner of the Bell Hotel, challenging last week's High Court ruling ordering the 138 asylum seekers to be moved out of the hotel by September 12.

Mr Justice Eyre granted Conservative-run Epping Forest Council an interim injunction last week after the authority claimed that Somani Hotels had breached planning rules by using the Bell as accommodation for asylum seekers.

Following the Court of Appeal’s ruling, Lisa Foster of Richard Buxton Solicitors, which represents Somani Hotels, said: “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."

The decision comes in the same week as a resident at the hotel, Hadush Gerberslasie Kebatu, has been on trial accused of sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl last month.

Multiple demonstrations were held at the Bell Hotel after Kebatu was charged.

Another man who was living at the site, Syrian national Mohammed Sharwarq, has separately been charged with seven offences, while several other men have been charged over alleged disorder outside the hotel.

Want a quick and expert briefing on the biggest news stories? Listen to our latest podcasts to find out What You Need To Know...