Ministers braced for further legal challenges after High Court Epping decision
The 12 councils where Reform UK is the largest party are understood to be exploring the prospect of legal challenges following Tuesday's ruling.
The Home Office had warned the judge that an injunction could 'interfere' with the department's legal obligations, and lawyers representing the hotel's owner argued it would set a 'precedent'.
Epping Forest District Council had asked a judge to issue an interim injunction stopping migrants from being accommodated at the Bell Hotel.
The hotel has been at the centre of a series of protests in recent weeks after an asylum seeker who was staying there was charged with sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl.
Reacting to the news, Mr Farage said that 'young, undocumented males who break into the UK illegally should NOT be free to walk the streets anywhere. They must be detained and deported'.
Chris Whitbread, leader of Epping Forest District Council, spoke to the media outside the Royal Courts of Justice in London on Tuesday (Yui Mok/PA)
'I hope that Epping provides inspiration to others across the country,' he said.
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch suggested that the migrants housed at the hotel 'need to be moved out of the area immediately', while her shadow home secretary Chris Philp said that 'residents should never have had to fight their own government just to feel safe in their own town'.
He said: 'Local residents have every right to feel safe in their own streets and every right to object when their community is treated as a dumping ground.'
A Labour source said the move by the Tory-led council, who did not challenge the Conservative government when they were housing asylum seekers, was politically motivated and authority leaders were 'scared' of Reform.
Asked on Tuesday why the council did not previously take legal action, Epping Forest District Council leader Chris Whitbread told the PA news agency: 'It goes back to 2020 when we were in the pandemic originally, and at that time, it was used for young families, women and children, which is completely different to having it used for single males.
'Obviously, we have always raised our concerns with the Home Office, whether it be the previous government or this government, we raised our concerns.'
Border security minister Dame Angela Eagle said the Government will 'continue working with local authorities and communities to address legitimate concerns'.
She added: 'Our work continues to close all asylum hotels by the end of this Parliament.'
Lawyers for the Home Office had warned that an injunction 'runs the risk of acting as an impetus for further violent protests' (Jordan Pettitt/PA)
Meanwhile, the council leader for Borough of Broxbourne Council, Corina Gander, told PA the High Court's injunction set a 'massive precedent' and the council would gather 'more detail about what Epping has done' before considering a bid to shut down another hotel housing asylum seekers.
Lawyers for the Home Office had warned the court that an injunction 'runs the risk of acting as an impetus for further violent protests'.
Edward Brown KC also said the injunction would 'substantially interfere' with the Home Office's statutory duty in potentially avoiding a breach of the asylum seekers' human rights.
Several protests and counter-protests have been held in the town since a then-resident at the hotel was accused of trying to kiss a teenage girl.
Hadush Gerberslasie Kebatu has denied the charges against him and is due to stand trial later this month.
Several protests and counter-protests have been held in the town (Yui Mok/PA)
A second man who resides at the hotel, Syrian national Mohammed Sharwarq, has separately been charged with seven offences, while several other men have been charged over disorder outside the hotel.
In a ruling on Tuesday, Mr Justice Eyre granted the temporary injunction, but extended the time limit by which the hotel must stop housing asylum seekers to September 12.
He also refused to give Somani Hotels Limited, the hotel's owner, the green light to challenge his ruling, but the company could still ask the Court of Appeal for the go-ahead to appeal against the judgment.
Piers Riley-Smith, for the company, asked the judge to be allowed to appeal against the ruling, citing its 'wide-reaching ramifications'.
He said that there was a 'compelling reason for the appeal to be heard', including the 'precedent that would be set' by the ruling and the impact that it could have 'on the wider strategy of the (Home Secretary) in relation to the housing of asylum seekers in hotels as part of meeting their statutory duties'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Rhyl Journal
6 minutes ago
- Rhyl Journal
How many asylum seekers are in UK hotels and why are they being housed there?
On Tuesday, Epping Forest District Council was granted a temporary injunction blocking asylum seekers from being housed at the Bell Hotel in the Essex town. Here, the PA news agency takes a look at the latest overall data. – How many asylum seekers are in hotels across the UK? The most recent Home Office data showed there were 32,345 asylum seekers being housed temporarily in UK hotels at the end of March. This was down 15% from the end of December, when the total was 38,079. New figures – published among the usual quarterly immigration data release – are expected on Thursday, showing numbers in hotels at the end of June. Figures for hotels published by the Home Office date back to December 2022 and showed numbers hit a peak at the end of September 2023 when there were 56,042 asylum seekers in hotels. – How many hotels are in use for asylum seekers? It is thought there were more than 400 asylum hotels open in summer 2023. Labour said this has since been reduced to fewer than 210. – Why are asylum seekers being housed in hotels? Asylum seekers and their families can be housed in temporary accommodation, known as contingency accommodation, if they are awaiting assessment of their claim or have had a claim approved and there is not enough longer-term accommodation available. The Home Office provides accommodation to asylum seekers who have no other way of supporting themselves on a 'no choice' basis, so they cannot choose where they live. When there is not enough housing, the Home Office can move people to accommodation such as hotels and large sites, like former military bases. In May, the National Audit Office said those temporarily living in hotels accounted for 35% of all people in asylum accommodation. – Is this likely to be a permanent arrangement? Labour has pledged to end the 'costly use of hotels to house asylum seekers in this Parliament' – which would be 2029, if not earlier. Campaigners and charities have long argued that hotels are not suitable environments to house asylum seekers. The Refugee Council said they 'cost the taxpayer billions, trap people in limbo and are flashpoints in communities' and urged the Government to 'partner with local councils to provide safe, cost-effective accommodation within communities'. – What is the Government saying since the legal ruling? Ministers are 'looking at a range of different contingency options' following Tuesday's ruling, according to security minister Dan Jarvis In the immediate aftermath of the judgment, border security minister Dame Angela Eagle repeated criticism of the previous Conservative government, saying Labour had 'inherited a broken asylum system'. She said the Government would 'continue working with local authorities and communities to address legitimate concerns' around asylum hotels. – What options does the Home Office have now? Last month, amid protests outside the Bell Hotel and more migrants crossing the Channel, an extra 400 spaces were being prepared to house male asylum seekers at RAF Wethersfield in Essex. The former military site, which has a usual capacity of 800 beds, is expected to house more adult men on a short-term basis. The Labour Government scrapped the large site of the Bibby Stockholm barge in Portland, Dorset, earlier this year, while Napier Barracks in Folkestone, Kent, is also due to end housing asylum seekers and be returned to the Ministry of Defence in September. – Why were there protests outside the Bell Hotel? The hotel in Epping has been at the centre of a series of protests in recent weeks after an asylum seeker who was staying there was charged with sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl – something he has denied and he is due to stand trial later in August. After the High Court's ruling, Reform UK leader Nigel Farage wrote in the Telegraph calling for Epping protests to inspire further action wherever there are concerns about the 'threat posed by young undocumented males' living in hotels. But on Tuesday more than 100 women's organisations wrote to ministers warning that vital conversations about violence against women and girls are being 'hijacked by an anti-migrant agenda' that fuels divisions and harms survivors. The joint statement, including from Rape Crisis England & Wales and Refuge, said: 'We have been alarmed in recent weeks by an increase in unfounded claims made by people in power, and repeated in the media, that hold particular groups as primarily responsible for sexual violence. 'This not only undermines genuine concerns about women's safety, but also reinforces the damaging myth that the greatest risk of gender-based violence comes from strangers.'
The Independent
6 minutes ago
- The Independent
Politicians making mischief over asylum hotels are in for an unwelcome surprise
The High Court's ruling that asylum seekers must be moved out of the Bell Hotel in Epping leaves Yvette Cooper, the home secretary, with a nasty headache. The small boats keep on coming, and, under the law, asylum seekers must be housed somewhere while their cases are assessed. The Home Office was behind the curve on the legal action by Tory-led Epping Forest District Council, issuing a last-minute plea to no avail. There is gloom among ministers, who fear a dangerous precedent has been set; they are privately bemused that the ruling was based on the hotel owner's failure to obtain a change of use permission under planning regulations. Ministers fear the ruling will encourage more protests outside other asylum hotels, creating an opening for the far right. The ruling shines an unwelcome spotlight on the small boats crisis. In fact, the government has had a reasonable run on this nightmarish issue in recent weeks, announcing a raft of initiatives in the fallow summer period, including the potentially game-changing "one in, one out" returns agreement with France. Today, Dan Jarvis, the security minister, hoped to highlight a returns deal with Iraq, but his media round was dominated by asylum hotels. He struggled to spell out what his 'other more appropriate accommodation' for migrants might be if more have to leave them. The Conservatives and Reform UK are making mischief, encouraging other local authorities to take legal action aimed at closing asylum hotels in their areas. Tory-run Broxbourne is already following Epping Forest's lead. The 10 authorities run by Reform will doubtless do the same. Nigel Farage has called for 'peaceful protests' outside the hotels to 'put pressure' on councils to go to law. This is divisive and irresponsible: if the far right again exploits such demonstrations, it will be nothing to do with Farage, of course. The Tories are enjoying the government's embarrassment, and their hypocrisy knows no bounds. The number of asylum hotels peaked at 402 under the Sunak government, when up to 56,000 people were housed in them. Today, 210 of the hotels house 32,000 people at a cost of about £5m a day. Labour has pledged to close them all by 2029, but the short-term pressures have now suddenly got worse. Sensible Tories know their party is guilty of double standards. A revealing WhatsApp exchange leaked to ConservativeHome shows that some Tory MPs complained about their party's anti-Labour attack ad criticising the 'huge list of freebies and perks' allegedly enjoyed by people in asylum hotels – because asylum seekers enjoyed the same standards under the Tory government. Lewis Cocking, the new MP for Broxbourne, wrote: 'This makes us look silly as we gave them all this too, which is why we are in the mess we are in today.' Kevin Hollinrake, the Tory chair, agreed with the criticism but didn't withdraw the ad. This goes to the heart of an intense Tory debate about how far the party should apologise for its mistakes in power on issues like immigration and the economy. Some party figures think the Tories will not get a hearing from voters until Kemi Badenoch makes a big bang mea culpa. But Rachel Maclean, the party's director of strategy, claims: 'We've done the mea culpas, we've done the apologies, we've done all that.' I hadn't noticed, and, more importantly, neither has the public. There is little sign the Tories have learnt lessons. Incredibly, Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, responded to the Epping ruling by calling on Labour to bring back the Tories' discredited Rwanda scheme. He is flogging a dead horse that would never have run even if last year's general election had not intervened. It's not easy for Badenoch. A messy tit-for-tat dispute ensued after she distanced her party from the Liz Truss mini-Budget by claiming Labour was making 'even bigger mistakes.' This half-hearted apology didn't stop the ever-unrepentant Truss from accusing Badenoch of repeating 'spurious narratives' to 'divert from the real failures of 14 years of Conservative government in which her supporters are particularly implicated.' Badenoch herself was not entirely absent from the scene of the crime: at the time, s he praised the Truss mini-Budget. I don't think the Tory leader will be taken seriously by voters until she makes a fuller admission of the party's mistakes in 14 years in office. Saying ad nauseam that her party is 'under new leadership' won't cut it. Nor can the Tories rely on an anti-Labour tide to sweep them back to power because voters have somewhere else to go – to Farage.
Spectator
18 minutes ago
- Spectator
Ex-Scottish Labour councillor joins Reform UK
Well, well, well. The Scottish Tories have lost a number of councillors to Nigel Farage's ranks and now Labour appears to be facing the same fate. This morning, a former Labour councillor in Fife who left the party over claims she was blocked from becoming a general election candidate has jumped ship to Nige's Scottish operation. Julie MacDougall – the daughter of Gordon Brown ally John MacDougall – is the latest local politician to have joined Reform UK. Another one bites the dust… Commenting on her move, MacDougall claimed she joined Farage's group after 'thoughtful consultation'. She added: I want more grown up, authentic politics and an opportunity to work together to offer better. I look forward to this exciting new chapter and I remain fully committed to serving the people of Fife as always with my full commitment, honesty and integrity. The announcement follows her dramatic decision last year to leave Labour in protest at the party 'parachuting' in a candidate based in London to the Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath seat. Melanie Ward MP was chosen for the constituency after the first candidate, Wilma Brown, was found to have liked 'racist' posts on social media, which described former first minister Humza Yousaf as the 'First Minister of Gaza' and 'Hamas Yousless'. What a mess, eh? MacDougall is the second former Labour councillor to have switched red for teal – although she did sit as an independent initially – after Reform picked up ex-Labour man Jamie McGuire in Renfrewshire. Steerpike has heard two more councillor defections are on the way. Party insiders also tell Mr S most candidates for next year's Scottish parliament elections have now been vetted and the list is set to be announced in late autumn this week. The party is causing quite the headache for the Scottish Conservatives – and it looks increasingly like Labour needs to watch out too…
