In a stunning reversal, senior judges at the Court of Appeal have overturned a High Court decision that would have shuttered the Bell Hotel in Epping as a housing site for asylum seekers.
According to The Standard, this ruling, following weeks of heated protests and violent clashes in Epping, has reignited tensions as residents, councillors, and politicians decry the decision, while three arrests were made during a recent demonstration outside the hotel.
The Bell Hotel, a historic establishment built in 1900 on a site used for lodging for centuries, ceased conventional operations during the pandemic to house asylum seekers. A new agreement to accommodate migrants was reached in February this year, sparking significant unrest over the summer. Protests intensified, fueled by reports of a hotel occupant accused of a child sex offense, leading to violent incidents including graffiti, thrown eggs, fireworks, and assaults on police and security guards.
Epping Forest District Council took legal action, arguing that using the Bell Hotel for asylum seekers violated planning rules and posed risks to local school children. The council's barrister, Philip Coppel KC, emphasized that this arrangement endangered nearby residents, particularly students at five schools within walking distance. Earlier this month, the High Court sided with the council, ordering the hotel to clear out asylum seekers by September 12 and scheduling a hearing for a final injunction in October.
Following the High Court ruling, ministers warned that forcing hotels nationwide to eject asylum seekers could lead to a "disorderly discharge," leaving thousands destitute on the streets. The Home Office, initially barred from intervening, supported Somani Hotels, the hotel's operators, in challenging the decision. Multiple councils across the country also signaled intentions to mount similar legal challenges against hotels housing migrants in their areas.
On Friday, the Court of Appeal, led by senior judges including Lord Justice Bean, Lady Justice Nicola Davies, and Lord Justice Cobb, reversed the High Court ruling. They found that the original judge, Mr. Justice Eyre, erred by excluding the Home Secretary from the case and improperly factoring protests into a planning dispute. Lord Justice Bean noted that closing one site like the Bell Hotel necessitates finding capacity elsewhere, warning that such injunctions could encourage other councils to follow suit.
Meanwhile, protests outside the Bell Hotel escalated, with violent clashes reported on Thursday night after the government's appeal application. On Friday evening, three men were arrested during a demonstration for offenses including violent disorder, assaulting a police officer, and drink-driving. Two Essex Police officers sustained minor injuries during the Friday protest, highlighting the growing tension in the community.
Essex Police responded by enforcing a Section 60AA order in Epping for 24 hours, allowing officers to demand the removal of face coverings used to hide identities. The police also monitored a protest in nearby Cheshunt, suspecting a group wearing facemasks and balaclavas planned to travel to Epping. Assistant Chief Constable Glen Pavelin stated, "We will always seek to facilitate peaceful protest, for all groups."
He added, "But the threat of anti-social behaviour and criminality by people attempting to conceal their identity steps outside of the reasonableness of protest, and we have a duty to protect our community." Local reactions to the Court of Appeal ruling were swift and emotional, with Epping resident Carmen expressing dismay. She said, "We come every week - march, protest - and today's ruling is just devastating, absolutely devastating. It will probably cause civil unrest."
Carmen continued, "It's shocking, it's like they've won. The schools go back next week - the kids will be walking around the back, it's not good." Waltham Abbey West councillor Shane Yerrell shared similar frustration, saying, "All the local parents felt like there was one big step forward when the High Court agreed to close the hotel and things started to calm down." He added, "But then for the Home Office and the Government to both appeal and that be accepted today is hurtful."
Politicians also weighed in, with Reform UK leader Nigel Farage criticizing the ruling, stating, "Illegal migrants have more rights than the British people under Starmer." Tory leader Kemi Badenoch called it a "setback," arguing that local communities bear the burden of failed immigration policies. Health Minister Stephen Kinnock defended the appeal, emphasizing a pragmatic approach to avoid disorderly closures that could worsen the situation for asylum seekers and communities.
Dame Angela Eagle, Minister for Border Security and Asylum, highlighted the government's goal to close all hotels used for asylum seekers by the end of this Parliament. She noted that the number of such hotels has nearly halved since its peak in 2023, saving 15% in costs, or £700 million, with projections to save £1 billion annually by 2028-29. Eagle also mentioned efforts to return over 35,000 individuals with no legal right to remain in the UK and new measures to combat people smuggling.
Despite the ruling, Epping Forest District Council remains determined, stating it is "ruling nothing out," including a potential appeal to the Supreme Court for a temporary injunction.
Enver Solomon of the Refugee Council urged faster action, arguing that hotels as flashpoints for protests fuel division and insecurity for refugees. As the legal and social battles over the Bell Hotel continue, the community of Epping braces for further unrest while awaiting the October hearing for a final decision.