The Bell Hotel in Epping, Essex, once a quiet fixture on the town’s high street, now finds itself at the center of a national debate over asylum policy, local governance, and the limits of protest. The situation reached a boiling point on Friday, August 29, 2025, when the Court of Appeal overturned a temporary injunction that had blocked the government from housing asylum seekers at the hotel—a decision that immediately sparked both legal and street-level reactions, as reported by Sky News, BBC, and Eastern Eye.
The legal wrangling began after Epping Forest District Council secured an injunction to halt the use of the Bell Hotel for asylum accommodation, citing public safety risks and alleged breaches of planning law. The move followed weeks of protests, some peaceful, others not, which erupted after an asylum seeker staying at the hotel was accused of sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl. The accused, Hadush Kebatu, denies all charges and is currently on trial, according to BBC and Eastern Eye.
On Friday, the Court of Appeal ruled decisively against the council’s injunction, with Lord Justice Bean describing the High Court’s earlier decision as “seriously flawed in principle.” The ruling emphasized that providing shelter to destitute asylum seekers is a legal obligation under the 1999 law and that human rights considerations outweigh local safety concerns. The judges also warned that using protests as grounds for legal action could “act as an impetus for further protests—some of which may be disorderly—around asylum accommodation,” a point echoed in BBC’s coverage.
Despite the government’s legal victory, the battle is far from over. At least 13 councils, including Labour-run authorities in Wirral, Stevenage, Tamworth, and Rushmoor, are pressing ahead with their own legal challenges to halt the use of hotels for housing asylum seekers. Reform UK, led by Nigel Farage, has instructed all 12 councils it controls to explore similar legal avenues. Conservative-run Broxbourne and Spelthorne councils have also confirmed plans to pursue enforcement action on planning grounds. The Times, cited by both Sky News and BBC, reported that these councils see the Epping case as a potential precedent for their own efforts, despite the recent setback.
The political response has been predictably fierce. Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch openly encouraged Tory councillors to “keep going” with legal action, despite the Court of Appeal’s decision. In a pointed statement, Badenoch declared, “Local communities should not pay the price for Labour’s total failure on illegal immigration. Keir Starmer has shown that he puts the rights of illegal immigrants above the rights of British people who just want to feel safe in their towns and communities.” Her comments, widely quoted in Sky News and Eastern Eye, reflect the growing polarization around asylum policy.
Reform UK’s Nigel Farage was equally strident, accusing the government of using the European Convention on Human Rights “against the people of Epping.” He argued that “illegal migrants have more rights than the British people under Starmer,” a sentiment that resonates with many of the protesters who have gathered outside the Bell Hotel and elsewhere.
On the ground, the protests have continued unabated. Thousands have attended demonstrations and counter-demonstrations in Epping and other towns throughout the summer. While most gatherings have remained peaceful, Friday’s protest turned violent, resulting in three arrests. Essex Police charged Jimmy Hillard, 52, with assaulting an emergency worker, and Ross Ellis, 49, with failing to provide a specimen. A third man remains in custody on suspicion of violent disorder, according to BBC and Sky News. Two police officers sustained minor injuries during the Friday disturbances, and dispersal orders were put in place to manage crowds and prevent face covering by demonstrators.
Local officials remain undeterred. Epping Forest District Councillor Ken Williamson voiced his disappointment with the court’s decision but insisted, “the battle is not over,” hinting at a possible appeal to the Supreme Court. Council leader Chris Whitbread echoed this resolve, telling BBC on Saturday that the council is “looking at all options, including appealing to the Supreme Court,” and that “people are very disappointed” by the judgment. A full High Court hearing on the Bell Hotel’s future is scheduled for October, but Whitbread expects protests to continue in the meantime, urging demonstrators to remain peaceful.
Not everyone sees continued legal action as wise. Barrister Chris Daw KC told BBC 5 Live that Epping Forest is “not going to succeed in the Supreme Court,” given the Court of Appeal’s clear stance on the human rights obligations at play. Nevertheless, councils like West Northamptonshire and Broxbourne argue that using hotels for asylum accommodation places “unreasonable and unsustainable strain on local services,” as Councillor Mark Arnull put it to BBC.
Meanwhile, the government is keen to move beyond the hotel system altogether. Home Office minister Dame Angela Eagle assured the public that the government is “committed to closing all asylum hotels by the end of this Parliament,” but stressed that closures must be handled “in a controlled and orderly way.” As of June 2025, 32,059 asylum seekers were being housed in hotels—down from a peak of 56,000 in September 2023, but still a significant figure. The number of asylum applications has also reached a record 111,000 in the year to June 2025, a 14% increase from the previous year, though processing rates have improved since Labour took office, according to Home Office data cited by BBC.
Enver Solomon, chief executive of the Refugee Council, told BBC Breakfast that the Court of Appeal’s ruling “does not solve the problems we’re facing,” pointing to the high daily cost of hotel accommodations and the sense of vulnerability felt by asylum seekers. “Our view is that we shouldn’t be using hotels. They have become a flashpoint for community concern, but also for far-right targeting as well,” Solomon said, calling for a government plan to close hotels in the coming months.
Labour peer Lord Falconer, meanwhile, defended the government’s current approach but acknowledged there is “a lot more to do.” He warned that failing to act decisively could drive public support toward Reform UK, which does not face the burden of implementing practical solutions.
As the legal and political wrangling continues, the fate of the Bell Hotel—and the broader issue of how Britain houses and supports asylum seekers—remains uncertain. What is clear is that the debate has moved far beyond a single hotel in Epping, tapping into national anxieties about immigration, community safety, and the responsibilities of government in a changing world.
