View source for AF v Nottinghamshire NHS Trust (2015) UKUT 216 (AAC), (2015) MHLO 43

"There is nothing in the law that ''requires'' the social circumstances report to have been written by a social worker or CPN and not a nurse, or requiring that the nursing report and social circumstances reports must have different authors, and the tribunal therefore did not err in law in having those two reports before it. Nor was there any legal requirement on the report’s author to attend the hearing and so the tribunal did not err in law in allowing another nurse to attend and speak to that report. Further, the question of whether any deficits in the report (assuming there were such) led the tribunal to err in law must be judged on the facts of the individual case.  In a case where the tribunal decided that the appellant had not got to the point of being able to be discharged and needed to remain under section, the relevance of any after-care package in place simply falls away.  And the tribunal adequately explained why it was not adjourning."

==External link==
{{#bailii:(2015) UKUT 216 (AAC)}}

[[Category:Upper Tribunal decisions]]
[[Category:No summary]]
[[Category:Transcript]]
[[Category:2015 cases]]