Asylum seekers will remain housed at the Bell Hotel in Epping after the government successfully appealed against a High Court ruling ordering their removal.
The Court of Appeal overturned the injunction, finding that while local concerns about crime had been considered, the earlier ruling failed to take into account the potential of incentivising protests. Judges also emphasised that the council’s full claim against the hotel is scheduled to be heard in October, making the injunction unnecessary.
The decision is regarded as a significant legal victory for the Home Office, restoring its ability to continue housing asylum seekers in hotels under its statutory duty to prevent destitution.
In practical terms, the ruling gives ministers breathing space to pursue what they have pledged will be a phased closure of hotel use for asylum accommodation before the next general election.
However, the judgement also carries political risks. While the government has prevailed in court, the optics of a national authority defeating a local community’s legal challenge may fuel further criticism amid ongoing debate over the use of hotels for asylum housing.
Local opposition to the Bell Hotel site has been vocal, with residents citing fears of crime and disruption, though no evidence has been presented to suggest an increase in criminal activity linked to the asylum seekers.
The appeal court made clear that ministers have a legal duty, set by Parliament, to ensure asylum seekers are not left homeless.
The full case between Epping Forest District Council and the Home Office will be heard in October.