‘Routine’ use of hotels for lone child asylum seekers is unlawful, UK court rules

The Home Office’s “routine” housing of unaccompanied child asylum seekers in hotels is unlawful, the high court has ruled.

The charity Every Child Protected Against Trafficking (Ecpat) brought legal action against the government department over the practice of housing unaccompanied youngsters in hotels, claiming the arrangements were not fit for purpose.

In a ruling on Thursday, Mr Justice Chamberlain said the use of hotels for unaccompanied asylum-seeking children had become unlawful, as the power to place the children in hotels “may be used on very short periods in true emergency situations”.

He told the court in London: “It cannot be used systematically or routinely in circumstances where it is intended, or functions in practice, as a substitute for local authority care.”

The judge continued: “From December 2021 at the latest, the practice of accommodating children in hotels, outside local authority care, was both systematic and routine and had become an established part of the procedure for dealing with unaccompanied asylum-seeking children.

“From that point on, the home secretary’s provision of hotel accommodation for unaccompanied asylum-seeking children exceeded the proper limits of her powers and was unlawful.

“There is a range of options open to the home secretary to ensure that unaccompanied asylum-seeking children are accommodated and looked after as envisaged by parliament.

“It is for her to decide how to do so.”

Ecpat’s case was heard alongside similar claims brought by Brighton and Hove city council and Kent county council against the department.

The Home Office and Department for Education had opposed the legal challenges and said the hotel use was lawful but was “deployed effectively as a ‘safety net’ and as a matter of necessity”.

In a 55-page judgment, Chamberlain said: “Ensuring the safety and welfare of children with no adult to look after them is among the most fundamental duties of any civilised state.”

As well as finding that the Home Office’s use of hotels to house child asylum seekers was unlawful, the judge also said Kent council was acting unlawfully in failing to accommodate and look after unaccompanied asylum-seeking children.

He said: “In ceasing to accept responsibility for some newly arriving unaccompanied asylum-seeking children, while continuing to accept other children into its care, Kent county council chose to treat some unaccompanied asylum-seeking children differently from and less favourably than other children, because of their status as asylum seekers.”

Chamberlain said the use of hotels could not be seen as an “emergency” measure given the length of their use. He said: “The home secretary has been accommodating children in hotels for over two years.

“It may be that, in June and July 2021, the home secretary could plausibly have contended that the commissioning of hotels was intended and functioning an emergency measure.

“It is much more difficult to make that case after September 2021, when she agreed the Kent protocol, which formalised the cap on the numbers of unaccompanied asylum-seeking children that Kent county council would accept, against a common understanding that any unaccompanied asylum-seeking children who arrived when the cap had been reached would be accommodated by the home secretary in hotels.

“She and Kent county council may well have hoped that it would not be necessary to use hotels, but it rapidly became clear that this intention was not being realised.”