The UK Court of Appeal found on Friday that the High Court’s temporary ban on asylum seekers being housed in a hotel in Epping runs the risk of encouraging further violent protests, as the lower court judge weighed them as a factor in favor of granting the injunction. The injunction is now overturned.

The Court of Appeal ruled that the High Court judge made several errors of principle. The appellate court found that the judge should not have weighed unlawful protests outside the hotel as a factor, although the judge had the right to exercise considerable caution. The court took note of the counsel for Epping admitting that the protests operated as a “trigger” for the application of the injunction.

The court also highlighted the judge’s disregard for the “obvious consequence” that closing one site of accommodation for asylum seekers will create a need to address capacity issues elsewhere in the system, as providing accommodation for asylum seekers is a national issue requiring a structured response. When the High Court granted the ‘temporary injunction’ on August 19, it was meant to last only for a relatively brief period until the pending trial date in mid-October, when the Epping Forest District Council’s application for a ‘permanent injunction’ will be heard.

The temporary injunction would have forced all 138 asylum seekers from the Bell Hotel to vacate by September 12. The appellate court’s decision allows these asylum seekers to stay past the date, but a final decision on the case will be made during the October trial.

Epping Forest District Council expressed disappointment over the court’s decision but added that “this is not the end of the matter.” Kemi Badenoch, the leader of the Conservative Party, further encouraged other Conservative councils that are seeking similar injunctions to “keep going.”

The local council applied for a temporary injunction earlier this month to restrain Somani from the use of the Bell Hotel as accommodation for asylum seekers under section 187B of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. The law provides the court with wide discretion regarding the grant of an injunction “as the court thinks appropriate for the purpose of restraining the breach.”

Since July, there have been protests outside the Bell Hotel, and some protests have involved violent and disorderly incidents resulting in several people being charged with criminal offenses.

The case reflects the broader discussion in the UK on immigration. Earlier this month, the UK Ministry of Justice announced that foreign nationals will face immediate deportation following conviction in court, stating that the new plan is intended to deter foreign nationals from committing crimes in the UK. Amnesty International also reported that the social media platform X has played a central role in fueling anti-Muslim and anti-migrant violence in the UK since the 2024 Southport stabbings.