Councils across England are poised to take legal action to remove asylum seekers from hotels in their areas.
It follows the High Court granting a district council a temporary injunction to block asylum seekers from lodging at The Bell Hotel in Epping, Essex.
All 10 councils controlled by Reform UK will “do everything in their power to follow Epping’s lead”, the party’s leader Nigel Farage said. A Conservative-run council in Broxbourne, Hertfordshire, also said it is considering taking similar action.
Border Security Minister Dame Angela Eagle said the government will “continue working with local authorities and communities to address legitimate concerns”.
Writing in the Telegraph, Farage urged people “concerned about the threat posed by young undocumented males living in local hotels” to “follow the example of the town in Essex” in peaceful protest.
The judge in the case ruled in favour of Epping Forest District Council after it argued that the hotel had become a public safety risk, as well as a breach of planning law.
Tory-run Broxbourne Council has since become the first local authority to declare it was seeking legal advice “as a matter of urgency about whether it could take a similar action” over a hotel in Cheshunt.
Meanwhile, the leader of South Norfolk District Council, also run by the Conservatives, said the council will not go down the same route over a hotel housing asylum seekers in Diss which has been the subject of protest.
Daniel Elmer said the authority was using planning rules to ensure it was families being housed in the area rather than single adult males.
Government ministers say they are braced for other councils to follow Epping’s lead.
The ruling causes immediate practical difficulties for the Home Office, which has less than a month to find alternative accommodation for the asylum seekers currently housed at the Bell Hotel.
Home Office lawyers have acknowledged that the ruling could “substantially impact” the government’s ability to house the 32,000 asylum seekers living in 210 hotels across the UK if other councils pursue similar action to Epping Forest District Council.
The Government has pledged to no longer use hotels by the end of this parliament, but some contracts are in place until 2029, and pressure could grow on ministers to find alternative accommodation at a greater pace than envisaged.
Dame Angela added: “Our work continues to close all asylum hotels by the end of this Parliament.”
The Home Office has also suggested The Bell Hotel injunction “runs the risk of acting as an impetus for further violent protests”.
Shadow home secretary Chris Philp said “the government needs to have the courage to set up and restore the Rwanda deterrent” which he said “would have stopped these crossing entirely”.
“Then we wouldn’t have the problem in the first place of having to accommodate tens of thousands of illegal immigrants,” Philp added.
Epping saw thousands of people protest outside the hotel after an asylum seeker living there was charged with sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl.
Hadush Kebatu, 41, denies the charges against him, while a second man who resides at the hotel, 32-year-old Syrian national Mohammed Sharwarq has been charged with two counts of common assault and four of assault by beating – concerning four complainants.
Essex Police said the protests, which were also attended by those in support of asylum seekers, became violent on occasion. Sixteen people have been charged with offences relating to disturbances during the demonstrations.
Conservative-run Epping Forest District Council was granted an injunction to block migrants staying at the hotel after an eleventh-hour effort from Home Secretary Yvette Cooper to have the council’s case dismissed was ignored.
The district council’s leader Chris Whitbread called the injunction “great news” but asked residents not to protest or “over-celebrate”, having previously said the protests risked causing “irreparable harm.”
“This is the beginning. It is not the end,” he added in response to the ruling.
Similar cases in recent years have seen judges refuse to intervene but Epping Forest told the court its case was different as the hotel had become a safety risk, as well as a breach of planning law.
During the case, the government’s lawyer said any injunction granted could act as “an impetus for further violent protests” and could “substantially interfere” with the statutory duty of the Home Office to avoid a breach of the asylum seekers’ human rights.
Asylum seekers staying at the hotel must move out of The Bell Hotel by 16:00 BST on 12 September, the judge ruled.
