THE Home Office is appealing a landmark migrant ruling in a bid to stop them from being kicked out of the Bell Hotel after protests.
If the government’s appeal is rejected, the ruling will see The Bell Hotel in Epping closed in just a few weeks.
The High Court ordered the removal of migrants from the hotel in Essex , which has become the face of the row over asylum seeker accommodation.
Mr Justice Eyre made his judgement after refusing an 11th-hour effort from Home Secretary Yvette Cooper to get the council’s case dismissed.
The Bell Hotel was the centre of protests after a migrant being housed there was charged with sexually assaulting a teenage girl – which he denies.
Demonstrations then cropped up outside of other asylum seeker hotels across the country.
But security minister Dan Jarvis today said the government will seek to appeal against the High Court ruling.
He said closing hotels housing asylum seekers must be done “in a managed and ordered way” as he unveiled Government plans to challenge the High Court’s decision related to the Bell Hotel in Epping.
He told broadcasters: “This Government will close all asylum hotels and we will clear up the mess that we inherited from the previous government.
“We’ve made a commitment that we will close all of the asylum hotels by the end of this Parliament, but we need to do that in a managed and ordered way.
“And that’s why we’ll appeal this decision.”
It is understood that there is a fresh wave of protests – at least 27 – planned outside of hotels this Bank Holiday weekend.
However anti-racism groups have warned towns and cities could experience the most disruption since last year’s summer riots.
Councils are also pushing back, following the lead of Epping Forest Council, which argued for the hotel to be closed to reduce the threat of “violent protests” and for the safety of those living nearby.
Mr Justice Eyre ruled the owners may have breached planning rules by housing migrants rather than paying customers.
But the Home Office argued that granting this application risks “acting as an impetus for further violent protests”.
High Court Judge Mr Justice Eyre ruled that the owners of The Bell Hotel – Somani Hotels Limited – might have breached planning rules by housing migrants at the site, rather than paying customers.
After a hearing in London’s High Court last week, Mr Justice Eyre said Somani Hotels Limited had “sidestepped the public scrutiny and explanation” by not applying for planning permission for the migrant hotel.
In his judgement, he said that while the council had not “definitively established” that Somani Hotels had breached planning rules, “the strength of the claimant’s case is such that it weighs in favour” of granting the injunction.
He said the fear of crime being committed by those accommodated there was a “relevant factor”, albeit one with “limited weight”.
In his judgement, he said it is “understandable” that recent arrests “form a basis for the local concern”.
He added: “The arrests have occurred in a relatively short period and have arisen when no more than 138 asylum seekers are accommodated in the Bell at any time.
“The consequence is that the fear said to be felt by local residents cannot be dismissed as solely speculation based on fear of what might happen from an activity which has not yet begun.”
The judge also said that had the hotel owners, Somani Hotels Limited, applied for planning permission, it would have given Epping Forest District Council and local residents a chance to air their concerns.
Philip Coppel KC, for the authority, said the situation was “wholly unacceptable” and provided a “feeding ground for unrest”.
He said: “There has been what can be described as an increase in community tension, the catalyst of which has been the use of the Bell Hotel to place asylum seekers.”
Mr Coppel continued: “It is not the asylum seekers who are acting unlawfully.
“It is the defendant, by allowing the hotel to be used to house asylum seekers.”
He added: “It really could not be much worse than this.”
The judge granted a temporary injunction in his ruling, meaning the hotel has to be cleared of its occupants by September 12.
Tory leader Kemi Badenoch issued a rallying cry to 33 Conservative councils while Reform and Lib Dem authorities are considering legal options.
Huge pressure from councils run by every political party could hasten the end of the hated Home Office policy.
Even Labour-controlled Wirral and Tamworth confirmed they are considering action against migrant hotels.
If more councils take action, ministers are unsure where more than 30,000 people in hotel rooms would live.
However Brighton and Hove City Council refused to launch a legal bid, saying it was a “proud city of sanctuary” and will continue to welcome and support asylum seekers.
Jacob Taylor, the local authority’s deputy leader, said “We will not comment on the location of hotels being used by the Home Office to provide temporary accommodation to people seeking asylum.
“I believe to do so in the current climate is irresponsible and risks causing division and unrest in our communities at a time when more than ever we need to bring people together.”
While some county councils will push for the closures, the legal steps to challenge the use of hotels falls to district and borough councils.
The Local Government Association called on the Home Office to work “much more closely” with authorities on asylum accommodation decisions.
t comes after it was revealed that a record number of people claimed asylum in the UK in the last year – with a massive 32,000 currently living in taxpayer-funded hotels.
Home Office data shows that 111,000 people claimed asylum in the year ending June 2025 up 14 per cent on last year.
It is higher than the previous recorded peak of 103,000 which was set in 2002.
The number of people claiming asylum in this country has almost doubled since 2021.
And just under half of all those applying for protection in the UK are granted it at the initial decision stage – 48 per cent.
It is lower than in 2022 when 77 per cent of those applying were given the green light.
Half of all those came via irregular routes – such as on a small boat or in the back of a lorry – while 37 per cent claimed asylum after previously arriving on a valid visa .
In the year up to March, the UK was the fifth biggest recipient of asylum seekers in the UK after Germany , Spain , Italy and France .
