Shadow home secretary Chris Philp said people have a right to protest after a High Court decision that prompted Conservative-led councils — including Broxbourne, Reigate and Banstead and Hillingdon — to consider legal action to stop hotels being used to house asylum seekers, following Epping Forest’s bid to secure an injunction against the Bell Hotel.
The shadow home secretary, Chris Philp, has stressed that people “have every right to engage in protest” in the wake of a High Court decision that observers fear could trigger a wave of demonstrations outside asylum hotels. Speaking to BBC Breakfast, Philp named three Conservative-led councils—Broxbourne in Hertfordshire, Reigate and Banstead in Surrey, and Hillingdon in London—as considering legal action against hoteliers whose properties are being used to house asylum seekers. The comments come as Conservative party leader Kemi Badenoch writes to town-hall leaders encouraging them to follow Epping Forest District Council’s lead by pursuing attempts to shut down such hotels, if their legal advice supports it. For followers of the dispute, the message is clear: while protests should be lawful, there is political momentum behind using local planning and legal routes to challenge the use of hotels for asylum accommodation. The discussion intersects with ongoing tensions over the Government’s handling of asylum policy and the communities hosting migrants.
Background for those watching the legal and administrative arc shows why the Epping Forest case matters beyond a single hotel. Epping Forest District Council won permission to apply to the High Court for an interim injunction to stop The Bell Hotel in Epping from housing asylum seekers, arguing that the premises are not being used as a proper hotel and that the current arrangement risks heightening community tensions and public-safety concerns. The council sought swift relief, with a filing requesting an injunction effective within fourteen days and a declaration that the hotel’s current use is not a permitted planning use for asylum-hosting. Local leaders have framed the issue as one of accountability—resident frustration has been a recurring theme, with council boss Chris Whitbread saying that listening and responsiveness from government have been lacking. Alongside that local dynamic, observers note that a broader constellation of Reform‑led councils are weighing similar measures; a Guardian briefing highlighted around a dozen such authorities weighing legal bids, reflecting a wider political strategy to contest migrant housing options.
The developing juridical picture is that the Bell Hotel case could set a precedent that other councils may seek to mirror, a possibility acknowledged by national and regional commentators. Sky News reported that, following the Epping ruling, ministers fear that similar injunctions could be pursued elsewhere, and that the decision has already fed into a broader policy and political debate about asylum hotels, localisation of housing, and public order. The same outlet covered further developments at the High Court, where a hearing examined whether the Bell Hotel’s use breaches planning rules, with the judge reserving his ruling and Somani Hotels Limited signalling an intention to appeal. As protests outside the Bell Hotel continued and the Home Office emphasised its statutory duties, the case underscored the political salience of hosting asylum seekers and the high-stakes legal mechanisms by which councils can challenge such arrangements.
📌 Reference Map:
Source: Noah Wire Services
Noah Fact Check Pro
The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first
emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed
below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may
warrant further investigation.
Freshness check
Score:
6
Notes:
🕰️ The narrative is recent but not brand‑new: the local authority’s own announcement applying for High Court relief was published on 12 August 2025 (earliest known formal publication), nine days before wider media coverage—so this story has been evolving for over a week. ([eppingforestdc.gov.uk](https://www.eppingforestdc.gov.uk/council-applies-for-injunction-against-bell-hotel-owners/?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) ⚠️ Major broadcast and national outlets reported the interim injunction and political fallout between 19–21 August 2025 (Sky, ITV, Guardian), showing rapid republication across mainstream channels rather than a single exclusive scoop. ([news.sky.com](https://news.sky.com/story/asylum-seekers-face-being-removed-from-epping-hotel-after-council-granted-high-court-injunction-13414157?utm_source=chatgpt.com), [itv.com](https://www.itv.com/news/2025-08-19/could-the-epping-asylum-hotel-injunction-set-a-precedent-for-other-councils?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) ✅ Strength: primary council press release exists (↦ explains why the piece is timely and why freshness is still credible).
Quotes check
Score:
3
Notes:
⚠️ The key direct lines attributed to Chris Philp (eg. that people “have every right to engage in protest” / “have every right to engage in peaceful protest”) were broadcast and published by multiple outlets (BBC/TV reports aggregated by Standard, ITV, Sky) before or alongside the Belfast Telegraph write‑up — indicating the quotes are reused from the broadcast interview rather than exclusive. ([standard.co.uk](https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/people-bbc-breakfast-chris-philp-conservative-hertfordshire-b1243880.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com), [itv.com](https://www.itv.com/news/2025-08-19/could-the-epping-asylum-hotel-injunction-set-a-precedent-for-other-councils?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) 🟨 Earliest online appearances of those same wordings are in contemporary broadcast coverage and wire copy; no evidence the Belfast Telegraph published original interview transcripts. If the article claims exclusive quotes, flag as misleading.
Source reliability
Score:
8
Notes:
✅ The core components are corroborated by the council’s own publication and by reputable national broadcasters and newspapers (Epping Forest District Council press release; Sky News; ITV; Guardian reporting). ([eppingforestdc.gov.uk](https://www.eppingforestdc.gov.uk/council-applies-for-injunction-against-bell-hotel-owners/?utm_source=chatgpt.com), [news.sky.com](https://news.sky.com/story/asylum-seekers-face-being-removed-from-epping-hotel-after-council-granted-high-court-injunction-13414157?utm_source=chatgpt.com), [itv.com](https://www.itv.com/news/2025-08-19/could-the-epping-asylum-hotel-injunction-set-a-precedent-for-other-councils?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) ⚠️ Amplification on tabloid and partisan outlets is present (The Sun, some aggregator sites) — these amplify the story but do not meaningfully add verification; editors should note potential for sensational framing on lower‑quality pages. ([thesun.co.uk](https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/36376733/migrant-hotels-crisis-labour-councils-revolt/?utm_source=chatgpt.com))
Plausability check
Score:
7
Notes:
✅ The legal claim (Epping Forest DC obtained interim injunctive relief re: the Bell Hotel) is well documented in court reporting and the council’s own release; secondary claims that other councils are “considering” similar legal steps are plausible and are independently stated by named councils (eg. Broxbourne) or reported as coming from party briefings. ([eppingforestdc.gov.uk](https://www.eppingforestdc.gov.uk/council-applies-for-injunction-against-bell-hotel-owners/?utm_source=chatgpt.com), [broxbourne.gov.uk](https://www.broxbourne.gov.uk/news/article/393/delta-marriott-hotel?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) ⚠️ Caution: the article mixes council press statements, party political messaging (Kemi Badenoch’s letter urging Tory councils), and commentary about protests — these are each true as discrete items but can be conflated to imply a coordinated legal campaign that is not yet fully realised. ([standard.co.uk](https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/kemi-badenoch-government-epping-home-office-essex-b1243844.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) 🛑 Also note a factual nuance: the council sought an injunction effective within 14 days (its filing) but the judge later set a different timetable (reports show extension to 12 September) — the timeline wording can be misleading if not made explicit. ([eppingforestdc.gov.uk](https://www.eppingforestdc.gov.uk/council-applies-for-injunction-against-bell-hotel-owners/?utm_source=chatgpt.com), [news.sky.com](https://news.sky.com/story/asylum-seekers-face-being-removed-from-epping-hotel-after-council-granted-high-court-injunction-13414157?utm_source=chatgpt.com))
Overall assessment
Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): PASS
Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): MEDIUM
Summary:
✅ Verified core claim: Epping Forest District Council applied to and secured interim High Court relief against use of the Bell Hotel for asylum accommodation — this is documented in the council’s release and in national court reporting. ([eppingforestdc.gov.uk](https://www.eppingforestdc.gov.uk/council-applies-for-injunction-against-bell-hotel-owners/?utm_source=chatgpt.com), [news.sky.com](https://news.sky.com/story/asylum-seekers-face-being-removed-from-epping-hotel-after-council-granted-high-court-injunction-13414157?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) ⚠️ Originality/freshness caveat: the narrative is largely a compilation of an earlier council press announcement (12 Aug 2025) and subsequent broadcast/wire coverage (19–21 Aug 2025); the Belfast Telegraph item repackages these already‑public developments rather than publishing exclusive new material. ([eppingforestdc.gov.uk](https://www.eppingforestdc.gov.uk/council-applies-for-injunction-against-bell-hotel-owners/?utm_source=chatgpt.com), [itv.com](https://www.itv.com/news/2025-08-19/could-the-epping-asylum-hotel-injunction-set-a-precedent-for-other-councils?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) ‼️ Disinformation risk: low for factual fabrication (multiple reputable confirmations), but medium for amplification risk — the piece reuses broadcast quotes and political messaging (eg. Kemi Badenoch’s letter encouraging Tory councils), which could spur protests if presented without contextual safeguards. ([standard.co.uk](https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/people-bbc-breakfast-chris-philp-conservative-hertfordshire-b1243880.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com)) 📝 Editors should: (1) mark the story as based on the council press release and subsequent broadcast interviews; (2) correct or clarify any timeline differences around the injunction timing (council’s 14‑day request vs judge’s timetable); and (3) avoid giving unqualified prominence to calls that might be read as encouraging public demonstrations without emphasising legality and policing responsibilities. ⚠️