High Court to hear urgent legal challenge against council over use of migrant barge

An urgent High Court challenge against Dorset Council is to be heard over the use of the Bibby Stockholm barge to accommodate asylum seekers in Portland Harbour.

The legal action, brought by Carralyn Parkes, a member of Portland Town Council and the Mayor of Portland, challenges the ongoing decision by the council that it has “no planning jurisdiction” over the vessel.

This comes two days after the councillor was refused permission on her claim against the Home Secretary.

Parkes had challenged the Home Secretary’s failure to obtain necessary planning permission to use the Bibby Stockholm to accommodate asylum seekers.

In the High Court on Wednesday (11 October), Mr Justice Holgate ruled that Parkes, who was bringing the claim in a personal capacity, did not have an arguable case.

The claimant is now seeking a determination by the court that Dorset Council has “erred in law in determining it cannot take planning enforcement action against the use and/or stationing of the Bibby Stockholm barge, notwithstanding that the Home Secretary has not applied for planning permission”, according to Parkes' law firm Deighton Pierce Glynn.

The three-storey Bibby Stockholm is docked at Portland Port in Dorset.

The Home Office began transferring people onto the barge at the beginning of August. Up to 500 men will eventually live on the vessel while they await the outcome of asylum applications.

On 7 August 2023, a group of asylum seekers were transferred onto the vessel, only to be urgently evacuated a few days later due to the discovery of a hazardous strain of legionella on board.

Deighton Pierce Glynn said: “Following the Court’s decision [on 11 October], our client has therefore been left with no option but to issue a claim against Dorset Council for their ongoing failure to take enforcement action in respect of the Bibby Stockholm, which she believes is part of their jurisdiction.

“Establishing that the local authority has jurisdiction over the barge would allow the nature of the plans to be properly examined and would ensure that relevant regulations are complied with. This is therefore a significant and important planning case with wider implications for the powers of local authorities.”

Commenting on the case, Parkes said: “I have been really reluctant to take my local authority to Court. Although I am acting as a private individual, as an elected Town Councillor I recognise the difficult position that the Home Secretary has put Dorset Council in. However, I also strongly disagree with Dorset Council’s ongoing determination that it does not have jurisdiction over the Bibby Stockholm barge.”

She added: “I feel very strongly that the decision to accommodate people in this way in Portland has been imposed upon us as the local community, without any consultation, without proper processes being followed, and without local people having the opportunity to raise concerns and objections. I believe that in the Twenty First Century the Bibby Stockholm is a wholly unsuitable place to house asylum seekers and I am very concerned about the risks to the vulnerable people who will shortly again be accommodated on the barge.”

A spokesperson for Dorset Council said: "Dorset Council is very disappointed at Ms Parkes’ decision to issue judicial review proceedings claim against the council.   

“Ms Parkes will be aware that, after much consideration and having taken advice from King’s Counsel, Dorset Council decided it was not appropriate to use public funds to actively pursue legal action against the Home Secretary regarding the siting of the Bibby Stockholm at Portland Port.   

“The council continues to stand by the decision it made in July this year that the Bibby Stockholm is outside of its planning jurisdiction and so does not have planning enforcement powers.  

“The arguments that Ms Parkes is making to dispute this position are materially the same as the ones put before the High Court earlier this week as part of her claim against the Home Secretary. Mr Justice Holgate found those arguments to be unarguable. Ms Parkes is now attempting reargue materially the same unarguable points, but replacing the Home Secretary with Dorset Council as the Defendant.   

“The council has already been required to incur legal costs by participating in Ms Parkes’ claim against the Home Secretary. Ms Parkes’ decision to pursue materially the same arguments against the council will simply force the council to incur further costs to local taxpayer’s money – funds which should be used to deliver services for the people of Dorset.  

“The council does not doubt that Ms Parkes is acting with good intentions and out of concern for those to be accommodated on the Bibby Stockholm. As publicly stated, the council shares many of those concerns. Ms Parkes’ cause is not served, however, by pursuing points against the council which the court has already found to be unarguable. 

“In his judgement on Wednesday this week Mr Justice Holgate invited Ms Parkes to undergo a process of “mature reflection” before issuing any fresh claim against the Council. Just two days later, however, Ms Parkes has done just that. The council invites Ms Parkes to reconsider her position, and allow the council to direct its efforts and resources towards delivering for the people of Dorset.”

Lottie Winson