2 days ago
Housing migrants in protest-hit Epping hotel was a 'financial lifeline' for its owners and ending its use for asylum seekers would cause 'financial harm', High Court hears
The housing of asylum seekers at a controversial hotel in Epping was a 'financial lifeline' for its owners, a court has heard.
The Bell Hotel has been targeted by spate of anti-immigration protests after one of its residents was charged with the sexual assault of a 14-year-old girl last month.
Epping Forest District Council is now seeking an injunction from the High Court against its owners, Somani Hotels Ltd, to stop migrants being housed there.
Barristers representing the company claimed at the High Court on Friday that the ending of the building's use an asylum hotel would cause 'financial harm'.
Piers Riley-Smith told the court that migrants were a monetary 'lifeline' for the hotel, which was only one per cent full in August 2022, when it was open to paying customers.
He added that an injunction would 'cause harm to the Home Office 's statutory duty to asylum seekers' and cause them 'hardship'.
It comes after lawyers representing the council said housing asylum seekers at the hotel is becoming a 'very serious problem' which 'could not be much worse'.
They claimed that Somani Hotels had breached planning rules as the site is no longer being used for its intended purpose as a hotel.
The injunction sought by the authority, if granted, would require the company to stop housing asylum seekers at the hotel within 14 days.
Opening the hearing in London, Philip Coppel KC, for the council, said: 'Epping Forest District Council comes to this court seeking an injunction because it has a very serious problem.
'It is a problem that is getting out of hand; it is a problem that is causing a great anxiety to those living in the district.
'The problem has arisen because of a breach of planning control by the defendant.'
Mr Coppel also referenced the alleged sexual assault of a teenage girl by an asylum seeker who was placed in the hotel and said several schools were in the nearby area.
He said: 'Having this sort of thing go on in such a concentration of schools with no measures in place to stop a repetition is not acceptable.'
He continued: 'It really could not be much worse than this.'
In written submissions for the hearing, Mr Coppel said there was a 'preponderance of factors overwhelmingly in favour of granting an injunction'.
He said these included removing 'the catalyst for violent protests in public places'.
The barrister added: 'Allowing the status quo to continue is wholly unacceptable, providing a feeding ground for unrest.'
He also told the court that the case has been brought against the hotel owner because it is the landowner, and had previously applied for planning permission.
Concluding his submissions, Mr Coppel told Mr Justice Eyre that if an injunction was not granted, 'Your Lordship will be telling the residents in Epping: 'You have just got to lump it''.'
He added that the council is 'acting in a proportionate way, in the interests of its residents', and that 'enough is enough'.
Piers Riley-Smith, representing Somani Hotels, told the court in written submissions that the injunction bid should be delayed to a later date.
He added that the Home Office's contracted service provider, Corporate Travel Management (North) Limited (CTM), should be involved in the case.
He continued that the alleged planning breach was 'not flagrant', and that it was 'entirely wrong' for the council to 'suggest the use has been hidden from them'.
The barrister told the court that the hotel previously housed asylum seekers from May 2020 to March 2021, and from October 2022 to April 2024.
He said that the council 'never instigated any formal enforcement proceedings against this use'.
He also said that while the company did apply for planning permission for a 'temporary change of use' in February 2023, this was a 'pragmatic attempt to address the claimant's concerns, rather than an acceptance that such a use required planning permission'.
This application was later withdrawn as it had not been determined by April 2024, the barrister said.
Asylum seekers then began being placed in the Bell Hotel again in April 2025, with Mr Riley-Smith stating that a planning application was not made 'having taken advice from the Home Office'.
Mr Riley-Smith also said that the company accepted that since the Southport riots in summer 2024, 'where the perpetrator was mistaken to be an asylum seeker', and the alleged sexual assault in Epping, 'there has been public concern about the use as evidenced by highly publicised violent and disorderly protests'.
He continued: 'However, the court should bear in mind - as recognised by the claimant - that these have spread far beyond locals who might have a genuine concern about their area to a wider group with more strategic national and ideological aims, but that does not necessarily mean the concerns are well-founded.
'Fears as to an increase of crime associated with asylum seekers or a danger to schools are common, but that does not make them well-founded.'
He added: 'It also sets a dangerous precedent that protests justify planning injunctions.'
Police issued a dispersal order in Epping before the march on July 24, which included the town centre and transport hubs such as the Underground station
The hearing before Mr Justice Eyre is due to conclude on Friday, with the judge saying it was 'unlikely' that a ruling would come this week.
He said: 'I am not going to close my notebook and give a decision now.
'I am going to reflect on this, but we need a decision sooner rather than later.'
The judge later said that he would give a ruling at 2pm on Tuesday.
He also ordered that Somani Hotels Limited could not 'accept any new applications' from asylum seekers to stay at the site until he had ruled on whether to grant the temporary injunction.
