High Court judge rules Bell Hotel in Epping can house asylum seekers
Epping Forest District Council had taken legal action
Asylum seekers can continue to be housed in the Bell Hotel in Essex after Epping Forest District Council failed to secure a High Court injunction that would block them from living there.
The council took legal action against the hotel owner, Somani Hotels, claiming that accommodating asylum seekers there breaches planning rules.
Lawyers for Epping Forest District Council (EFDC) said the housing of asylum seekers is a "material change of use" and has caused "increasingly regular protests".
The Home Office intervened in the case, telling the court the council's bid was "misconceived".
Mr Justice Mould dismissed the claim on Tuesday and said in a judgment that it is "not a case in which it is just and convenient for this court to grant an injunction".
EFDC were granted a temporary injunction earlier this year following protests outside the hotel, which would have stopped 138 asylum seekers being housed there beyond September 12.
But this was overturned by the Court of Appeal in August, which found the decision to be "seriously flawed in principle".
EFDC then sought a permanent injunction through a three-day hearing last month.
In an 87-page judgment, Mr Justice Mould said: "I have reached the clear conclusion that this is not a case in which it is just and convenient for this court to grant an injunction.
"I give due respect to the claimant's judgment that the current use of the Bell as contingency accommodation for asylum seekers constitutes a material change in the use of those premises which requires planning permission.
"Nevertheless, I have not been persuaded that an injunction is a commensurate response to that postulated breach of planning control.
"The breach is far from being flagrant."
Mr Justice Mould also said in his written judgment about the Bell Hotel: "The claimant's desire to find a swift resolution to the disruption to public order and the community tensions which followed the outbreak of street protests on July 11 2025 was reasonable.
"It does not however follow that the solution lay in an application for an injunction."
He continued: "Public opposition to the development of land, even if that opposition manifests itself in street protests, is not in itself evidence of planning of environmental harm generated by the development to which there is such strong objection.
"The police have a panoply of powers to manage and regulate street protests and to enforce public order."
The High Court judge added: "There are countervailing factors in this case which are properly to be weighed in the balance against the planning and environment harm which may reasonably be said to result from the postulated breach of planning control.
"In particular, the evidence before me clearly establishes that there is a continuing need to source contingency accommodation for asylum seekers from hotels to enable the Home Secretary to discharge her statutory responsibilities under the 1999 Act."