The High Court has permanently banned asylum seekers being housed in Great Yarmouth seafront hotels.
A granting of a final injunction order follows a temporary ban preventing migrants from being placed in town hotels under a Home Office scheme.
In September, it was revealed dozens of asylum seekers had been or were to be housed at Hotel Victoria, on King's Road just off the seafront.
Two other sites, the Villa Rose Hotel, on Prince's Road, and the Embassy Hotel, on Camperdown, were also lined up to take more due to large numbers of asylum seekers arriving in the UK by boat.
Great Yarmouth Borough Council strongly criticised the scheme, arguing that seafront hotels were covered by the Local Plan, and should not be used as that constituted a change of planning use from hotels to hostels.
The council said it used its full suite of planning enforcement tools to ensure the issue did not occur but ultimately turned to the courts to ask for a planning injunction.
A similar legal case taken to stop asylum seekers from being housed at the Rose and Crown in Wisbech had failed to secure a temporary injunction.
However, in Great Yarmouth, a temporary ban on housing asylum seekers in hotels in November was granted.
One month later, the High Court granted an ongoing injunction to block the use of 59 hotels on or near the seafront to house asylum seekers - a move described as a "victory for common sense" by Great Yarmouth MP Brandon Lewis.
At the latest hearing at the High Court Judge Justice Holgate issued a Final Injunction Order which prevents Serco, Amayo Properties Ltd and H & H North Ltd from seeking to use any hotels to house asylum seekers within an area – known as 'GY6' - designated in the borough’s Local Plan as containing key tourist accommodation.
The council’s Local Plan contains a strategy for protecting and enhancing an area formally designated as ’the seafront‘ in the town.
There has been, and continues to be, a long-term strategy to protect and enhance tourism and the facilities - including its 59 hotels - in that location.
Justice Holgate recognised this when he acknowledged: "GY6 is a highly specific, protective policy directed to a large and highly important sector of the borough's economy."
The council said it has a long history of protecting the area and brought the judge’s attention to an enforcement notice it had served for a similar breach 17 years earlier.
A council spokesperson said: "Our town has a long and proud history of welcoming and supporting people from all over the world.
"We continue to help support asylum seekers placed in the town who have no control over where they are accommodated.
"However, we have a responsibility to enforce planning laws and make sure residents and businesses all play by the same rules and are protected from unauthorised and inappropriate use of local properties.
"Tourism, and the economic benefits it affords the town, are crucial and it was essential we took this action to protect the sector and those it supports.
"The council argued its case on planning grounds and this verdict demonstrates the importance of having an up-to date-plan and a very clear planning policy to support our actions."
A Serco spokesperson said the hotels were only used as a last resort.
"With the significant increases in the number of people arriving in the UK we have been faced with no alternative but to temporarily accommodate some asylum seekers in hotels," the spokesperson said.
"The Serco team is working extremely hard to move people into dispersed social housing as rapidly as possible.”
At the latest court hearing, the judge ordered the three defendants to pay costs of between £12,000 and £14,000 each.
The bid by Serco to house asylum seekers in more Yarmouth hotels had been resisted by Mr Lewis.
In December, he said it had taken "brave leadership" by the borough council and its leader Carl Smith to pursue the legal action.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here