Asylum seekers to be moved out of protest-hit Epping hotel after council wins temporary ban
A judge will move to the local council after a temporary precautionary decision that prevents immigrants from taking place there.
The EPPING Forest Regional Council had applied for a precautionary measure decision to stop its hosting at Bell Hotel, which has recently been a series of protests.
Interior Minister Yette Cooper argued that other councils would make similar applications for immigrants in local regions, and attempted to stop a proposal in the high court for the removal of asylum seekers from the hotel.
However, a judge rejected his application and decided in favor of the Council by making a temporary precautionary measure. Justice Eyre gave the asylum seekers from the hotel until September 12th.
The defendant Somani Hotels Limited will try to apply to the appeal court to reverse the decision.
Mrs. Cooper asked the judge for permission to intervene. The EPPING Forest Region Council offers asylum seekers from the Bell Hotel in ESSEX, a proposal for a temporary precautionary measure.
Edward Brown KC said to the Ministry of the Interior, ısışılmışı The shortage of asylum accommodation is acute, and if EPPING’s proposal is successful, “There may be similar applications made elsewhere, and aggravate the pressures on the shelter land”.
However, last -minute intervention was rejected by Mr. Justice Eyre on Tuesday before the precautionary measure decision.
If the precautionary measure decision means that Somani Hotels Limited, the owner of the hotel, should stop housing asylum seekers in the field, which is the focus of a series of violent protests within 14 days.
Mr. Brown KC said to the Ministry of the Interior: “If it is given by the court by the court, it will significantly affect the legal duties of the Minister of the Interior.”
“Local authority must actually take some into consideration for the wider public interest in this application.” He added that the precautionary measure proposal “causes today’s acute challenges”.
He said that the Minister of the Interior did not apply to participate in the previous precautionary measures made by other councils, but in this case it was a “very strong reason” to do so. Mr. Brown KC said the court did not fully consider the wider effects of the Council’s application on the task of the Ministry of Interior to provide accommodation to asylum seekers.
“The problems are so great that the Foreign Minister believes that it is necessary to attract the attention of the court. We acknowledge that it is new.
Philip Coppel KC for the Council said that the last -minute intervention offer was a “completely fruitless application”. “The effect is to remove the court process from the rail, to make the court make your decision,” he said.
“On the other side, it is not enough to say that we have a problem or demand without saying what happened to meet this demand,” Coppel said. He argued that asylum seekers can be carried “comfortably ve and add the following in two weeks: ı If they can go in, they can go out”.
Justice Eyre said that the Ministry of Interior was informed about the application of a precautionary measures on August 12th. The application said that he would waste more court time ”and said, ısı whether one of the issues in the proceedings is a violation of planning control”.
Last week, the Supreme Court heard that the hotel has become a “nutrition area for restlessness” and argued that the Council asylum seekers to stay in accommodation was “a danger to start the new school year of school -age students.”
Protesters, a 14 -year -old girl allegedly trying to kiss an asylum seeker, after being accused of sexual assault on the field.
A second man was allegedly sexually harassed a man over 16 years of age and a series of attacks as well as sexual harassment.
Coppel KC, representing the Council, said that the hotel usage is a “very serious problem”.
Somani Hotels Ltd told the court that a precautionary measure decision would lead to asylum seekers “difficulties ve and that the movement would determine a dangerous precedent that protests justify prudent measures.
