View source for Re RB (Adult); A London Borough v RB (Adult) (No 1) (2010) EWHC 2423 (Fam)

''This case under the inherent jurisdiction concerned RB's best interests in relation to residence and contact. Of the 16 issues considered by the judge, he found for RB's partner MF in relation to one sub-issue (which was a 'saddening example of the institutional inability of some bureaucracies ever to admit that something has gone wrong') but against him in relation to all others (most of which were MF's unfounded criticisms of almost everybody involved in the case: the judge's own criticisms of Dr Kahtan and the MP are worth reading). Had she not died during the hearing, it would have been, given MF's inability to cooperate with any community care package, in RB's best interests to continue residing at the care home.''

==Related judgments==
*[[Re RB (Adult); A London Borough v RB (Adult) (No 4) (2011) EWHC 3017 (Fam)]]
:*[[Re RB (Adult); A London Borough v RB (Adult) (No 3) (2011) EWHC 2576 (Fam)]]
::*[[Re RB (Adult); A London Borough v RB (Adult) (No 2) (2011) EWHC 112 (Fam)]]
:::*[[Re RB (Adult); A London Borough v RB (Adult) (No 1) (2010) EWHC 2423 (Fam)]]

==Other==
Hearing: 21/8/09

Judgment: 30/9/10

Before: Munby J

Ms Nicola Greaney (instructed by the London Borough) lodged written submissions on behalf of the Claimant

Ms Angela Hodes (instructed by the Official Solicitor) lodged written submissions on behalf of the First Defendant

The Second Defendant appeared in person

==Citations==
Re RB (Adult); A London Borough v RB (by her litigation friend the Official Solicitor) and MF [2010] EWHC 2423 (Fam)

==External link==
{{#bailii:(2010) EWHC 2423 (Fam)}}

[[Category:Other capacity cases]]
[[Category:Brief summary]]
[[Category:Transcript]]
[[Category:2011 cases]]