The asylum seekers will leave a hotel in England after the local authority received a temporary court order restricting them from staying there.
Epping Forest Council in Essex has applied to the court for an order to impose prior restrictions on migrants being accommodated at the Bell Hotel in Epping.
Reform UK leader Nigel Farage described the London High Court ruling in the case as a “success”, expressing confidence that the decision would “motivate citizens across the country”. The shadow Home Secretary, in turn, confirmed the “legitimate right of residents to express their disagreement” with the resettlement of people in their locality.
The 12 councils where Reform UK has the most influence are considering taking legal action following Tuesday's ruling, according to figures.
The Home Office warned the court that the restrictions could “contradict” its legal obligations, while lawyers for the hotel owner pointed to the risk of creating a “legal precedent”.
Epping Forest council has reiterated its request to a judge to uphold temporary restrictions on migrants staying at the Bell Hotel.
The building has recently become the epicenter of a wave of protests after a criminal case was opened against one of the residents, accused of sexually assaulting a minor.
Commenting on the situation, Mr Farage said: “Undocumented young men who have entered the UK illegally should NOT be allowed to roam the streets unchecked. They should be detained and removed from the country.”
“I hope Epping's example will serve as a benchmark for other regions,” he added.
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said there was a need to “urgently stop migrant accommodation in the area”, while her colleague Chris Philp said: “Citizens should not have to stand up to their own government to feel safe in their home towns.”
He stressed: “Local residents have the right to demand safety on the streets and to oppose the transformation of their community into a transit point.”
Labour insiders said the move by the Tory-controlled council, which had previously not challenged refugee resettlement under the Conservatives, was politically motivated and officials were “fearful” of Reform UK's actions.
Asked on Tuesday why there had been no previous legal action, Epping Forest council leader Chris Whitbread told the PA news agency: “The scheme was launched in 2020 amid the pandemic and initially targeted families with children, which is fundamentally different to the current situation for single men.”
“We have consistently expressed our concerns to the Ministry of Internal Affairs, regardless of the party affiliation of the current government.”
Border Minister Angela Eagle confirmed the government's commitment to “continuing engagement with local governments to address community concerns”.
She added: “The work to clear hotels of refugees will be completed before the end of the current parliamentary term.”
Broxbourne council leader Corina Gander told PA the Supreme Court ruling set an “important precedent” and the council would look at “the details of the Epping case” before deciding whether to close another asylum seeker hotel.
Representatives of the Ministry of Internal Affairs warned the court about the potential “increase in protest activity” if the ban is introduced.
Edward Brown QC said the restriction “could significantly hinder” the agency's ability to carry out its duties to protect refugees.
Numerous protests and counter-demonstrations took place in the town after one of the residents was accused of attempting to have sexual relations with a minor.
Hadush Gerberslasi Kebatu, who denies the charges, is awaiting trial later this month.
Syrian national Mohammed Sharwark, another hotel guest, faces seven separate charges, while several people have been charged with public disorder near the building.
On Tuesday, Judge Eyre granted a temporary injunction, extending the hotel's vacancy until September 12.
He refused permission for Somani Hotels Limited, which owns the hotel, to appeal the decision, reserving its right to appeal to a higher authority.
The company's lawyer, Piers Riley-Smith, citing the “massive implications” of the verdict, asked for the right to retrial.
He said there were “compelling grounds for appeal”, including the precedent it was setting and its impact on the Home Office's “overall strategy for accommodating asylum seekers in a manner that meets legal requirements”.
Sourse: breakingnews.ie
