The judge who ruled asylum seekers can continue to be housed at an Essex hotel has been reported to the judiciary amid claims of ‘apparent bias’ over his links to left-wing organisations.
Lord Justice Bean delivered Friday’s landmark Court of Appeal ruling, which meant an initial injunction preventing the Bell Hotel in Epping Forest from housing migrants was no longer valid.
Lord Justice Bean, sitting with two other judges, said the initial judge made ‘a number of errors in principle’. It represented a victory for the Home Office, who can continue to use hotels to house asylum seekers, despite concerns from local councils and protests from communities.
But a leading barrister has referred the senior judge to the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO), which deals with discipline, amid claims of potential conflicts of interest.
Lord Justice Bean was chairman of the socialist Fabian Society from 1989 to 1990 which works very closely with Labour.
He was succeeded by Labour grandees including the former Foreign Secretary Robin Cook, Treasury minister Ed Balls, Children’s minister Margaret Hodge, and London Mayor Sadiq Khan.
He was one of the founding members of the Matrix Chambers, alongside Cherie Blair, wife of the former Labour Prime Minister Tony Blair, while Lord Hermer, the current Attorney General, joined later.
Lord Justice Bean is also reported to have served as a treasurer for the Society of Labour Lawyers, which describes itself ads a ‘think-tank and affiliated socialist society which provides legal and policy advice to the Labour Party’.
Lord Justice Bean has historical links to Labour-related organisations, prompting a complaint from a leading barrister of ‘apparent bias’
A red St George’s cross is painted outside the Bell Hotel in Epping Forest
Protesters in the car park outside the Brook Hotel in Norwich demanding closure of all illegal migrant hotels
Protesters calling for the closure of the Bell Hotel gather outside the council offices in Epping
Barrister Steven Barrett, who referred the judge to the JCIO, said in a social media post: ‘He should not have heard the Bell Hotel appeal.’
Mr Barrett made the complaint on Thursday, before the ruling was handed down, citing ‘public trust and confidence in the Judiciary’.
Writing after Friday’s ruling, he added: ‘I highlighted this issue before the judgment – because it was an issue already.
‘It is far more of an issue now.
‘The issue is apparent bias – not actual bias.
‘Justice must be seen to be being done.’
The ruling left the Government facing claims it had put ‘the rights of illegal immigrants above the rights of British people’.
Asylum seekers staying at the Bell later thanked Sir Keir after the ruling.
People have protested outside of the Bell Hotel in Epping Forest over the past few weeks
Lord Justice Bean handed down the ruling on Friday, which meant the Home Office could continue to house asylum seekers in hotels
Protesters have previously gathered outside the Essex hotel, concerned that it is being used to house asylum seekers
Steven Barrett referred the judge to the judicial conduct office
Somani Hotels, which owns the Bell Hotel, and the Home Office challenged a High Court ruling which would have stopped 138 asylum seekers being housed there beyond September 12.
In an initial ruling, Mr Justice Eyre granted Epping Forest District Council (EFDC) an interim injunction after the authority claimed that Somani Hotels had breached planning rules by using the Bell as accommodation for asylum seekers.
But ministers were criticised for challenging the move, and Tory leader Kemi Badenoch said: ‘Local communities should not pay the price for Labour’s total failure on illegal immigration.’
She called on Conservative councils to continue to seek similar injunctions against asylum hotels in their areas.
Several councils have already signalled their intentions to make similar legal challenges, despite the Court of Appeal ruling.
This includes Labour-run authorities.
Reacting to the ruling, Home Office minister Dame Angela Eagle said the Government was committed to closing all asylum hotels by the end of this Parliament, but added that it appealed against the High Court ruling so that hotel use can be ended in a ‘controlled and orderly way’.
Epping Forest District Council has said it is ‘ruling nothing out’ following the Court of Appeal decision, including taking its bid for a temporary injunction to the Supreme Court.
Overturning the High Court’s grant of a temporary injunction, the judges cited concerns that it could incentivise ‘disorderly’ and ‘unlawful’ protests around asylum accommodation; the council’s delay in bringing its legal challenge, described as ‘procedurally unfair’; and the ‘risk of injustice’ if residents were removed from the hotel ahead of the full hearing on the matter in October.
Epping’s legal challenge followed a series of protests outside the hotel amid accusations of sexual assault regarding two men being housed there.
Some protests saw clashes with police, resulting in six men being charged with violent disorder, two of whom have pleaded guilty.
