Epping Forest DC's written arguments say planning permission was discussed but on 15 May hotel owners said: "The Home Office has advised that in the Government's opinion the hotel is contracted on exclusive use terms as a hotel, not a hostel, and so they do not support a change of use application"
The term “hotel” is not defined in planning legislation, so we're on case law in the High Court
Epping Forest District Council argues that asylum seekers do not pick the hotel or the length of their stay and are therefore not "guests", and that the Bell Hotel is a “hotel” only in name
Replies
-
Piers Riley-Smith, for Somani Hotels Limited which owns The Bell Hotel, is now making his submissions
He argues that the high bar for an injunction is not met, that CTM should be a party and that an injunction would cause harm to hotel owners and to "Home Office’s statutory duty to asylum seekers"
-
I'm genuinely shocked that a Local Authority is taking this action
