Epping asylum hotel Supreme Court appeal by council refused
A full High Court hearing to discuss a permanent injunction is scheduled for October
The Court of Appeal has refused an application from Epping Forest District Council (EFDC) for permission to appeal to the Supreme Court against the former court's ruling allowing asylum seekers to continue to be housed at a hotel in the area.
The Bell Hotel in Epping became the focal point of several demonstrations and counter-protests in recent weeks after a resident asylum seeker was charged with sexually assaulting a teenage girl last month. He has denied the charges.
The council was granted an interim injunction to stop 138 asylum seekers being housed there before a successful Court of Appeal challenge from the Home Office and the hotel's owners, Somani Hotels, overturned the High Court ruling.
Councillor Chris Whitbread, Leader of Epping Forest District Council said: "We believe the Court of Appeal decision to overturn the interim injunction for the closure of the Bell Hotel was wrong.
The Court of Appeal judges appear to have placed the Secretary of State’s duties towards asylum seekers above those of the council to uphold the planning system.
It is the planning system that provides an orderly forum for local concerns about the use of land to be debated, decided and enforced, consistently with published policies.
Overriding that system by forcing the council to accommodate the Secretary of State’s “wider interests” weakens that system, and only serves to encourage disorderly means of expression. This is not the way of the council.
We represent the interests of local residents. The implications for local democracy and good government are profound if the Home Secretary’s powers trump the statutory responsibilities of councils. However, this is not the end of the matter.
We consider we have a strong case for a final injunction. The final injunction hearing is expected to be heard some time in early October.
In the meantime, the council is keeping all our options open, including seeking permission from the Supreme Court to appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal."