The Court of Appeal revoked an interim injunction that had barred the Bell hotel in Essex from housing asylum seekers after Epping Forest district council claimed planning-law breaches. The hotel's owner, Somani Hotels, and the Home Office challenged the order, alleging the council was using planning law to curb protests. The council said it had long believed the hotel breached planning rules but had not acted until protests escalated after an asylum seeker at the hotel was charged with alleged sexual offences in July. Reports indicate the demonstrations were partly orchestrated by far-right extremists. Judges overturned the earlier high court decision, and the Home Office said the injunction was the wrong tool to stop the protests.
A lawyer representing Epping Forest district council told the court of appeal on Thursday it had not previously moved against the hotel, despite believing for years it was in breach of planning law by housing asylum seekers, because the situation had been seen as unproblematic. That changed around the time that protests began after an asylum seeker housed at the Bell hotel was charged with alleged sexual offences in July, the council's lawyer Robin Green indicated.
Reports have shown the protests to have been partly orchestrated by far-right extremists. While the council had included the protests alongside planning issues among its concerns in seeking the original high court injunction, Thursday's submission to the court of appeal was the clearest indication yet that the demonstrations were the principal catalyst for its urgent legal action.
Responding to the submission on Thursday, Edward Brown KC, representing the Home Office, told the judges: Epping has effectively conceded before this court that this was, in truth, only ever about protest. He said the interim injunction was simply the wrong tool for stopping asylum hotel demonstrations.
Collection
[
|
...
]