NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #22

[nauticant]

Sandie Peggie, a nurse at Victoria Hospital in Kirkcaldy (VH), has brought claims in the employment tribunal against her employer; Fife Health Board (the Board) and another employee, Dr B Upton. Ms Peggie’s claims are of sexual harassment, harassment related to a protected belief, indirect discrimination and victimisation. Dr Upton claims to be a transwoman, that is observed as male at birth but asserting a female gender identity.

The Employment Tribunal hearing started on Monday 3 February 2025 and was expected to last 2 weeks. However, after 2 weeks it was not complete and it adjourned part-heard. It is planned that it will resume on 16 July and the last day of evidence will be 28 July and then there will be 2 days of submissions from counsel meaning that the hearing will end on 30 July.

The hearing commenced with Sandie Peggie giving evidence. Dr Beth Upton gave evidence from Thursday 6 February to Wednesday 12 February.

Access to view the hearing remotely was obtainable by sending an email request to [email protected] headed Public Access Request (Peggie v Fife Health Board) 4104864/2024 and requesting access.

However, as a result of problems with the livestreaming, apparently caused by a very large number of observers, remote public access to the hearing was suspended on Tuesday 11 February. It was suggested that it might be reinstated at some point but don't count on it.

The hearing is being live tweeted by https://x.com/tribunaltweets and there's additional information here: https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/peggie-vs-fife-health-board-and-dr. This also has threadreaderapp archives of live-tweeting of the sessions of the hearing for those who can't follow on Twitter, for example: archive.is/xkSxy.

An alternative to Twitter is to use Nitter: https://nitter.poast.org/tribunaltweets

Thread 1: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5186317-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse
Thread 2: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5267591-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-thread-2
Thread 3: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5268347-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-3
Thread 4: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5268942-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-4
Thread 5: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5269149-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-5
Thread 6: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5269635-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-6
Thread 7: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5270365-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-7
Thread 8: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5271511-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-8
Thread 9: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5271596-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-9
Thread 10: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5271723-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-10
Thread 11: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5272046-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-11
Thread 12: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5272276-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-12
Thread 13: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5272398-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-13
Thread 14: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5272939-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-14
Thread 15: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5273119-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-15
Thread 16: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5273636-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-16
Thread 17: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5273827-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-17
Thread 18: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5274332-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-18
Thread 19: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5274571-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-19
Thread 20: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5275782-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-20
Thread 21: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5276925-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-21

I respectfully suggest that an NHS-only doctor does not need indemnity cover for his NHS work as the NHS covers them. Though they really ought to have it for good Samaritan or ad hoc work. Some professional and employment issues are covered either by the BMA or on a discretionary basis by a medical defence organisation, and I guess a doctor who was sued by his employer for subjecting them to excess costs in an ET by his actions might well be covered. Particularly, I think the MDU would generally cover this sort of thing.

My guess, given how captured NHS Fife is, will be that they cover both claiments costs.

It could get wince-worthy if Sandie wins and they do not.

They should really go after Stonewall if they lose…

Sorry, I'm going back again, but if DU's belief was to be judged as WORIADS, then wouldn't the comparator be someone without that belief, and a man without the belief that he is a woman would also be excluded from the female changing rooms, so it's not discrimination on the basis of that belief. Or am I mixing up too many things?

I agree with the benefit of hindsight it is an own goal. Particularly if they want to settle the case. In my view, IANAL, I believe Fife Hospital will have picked up the legal bill so far believing that a) their policies were lawful b) DU had been subject to discrimination c) claims that SPs behaviour impacted patients were true d ) the investigation was done properly e) SP had no case and wouldn’t hold her nerve to see the ET through.

If NC succeeds in making Kate Searle (KS) the 3rd respondent she may well join IB as scapegoat. I don’t think DU will have an easy future there are two key issues:
a) whether or not there is evidence to support their claims that on two occasions SPs behaviour impacted patients - basically DU has accused SP of professional misconduct which could end her career, if it isn’t true he has behaved unprofessionally.
b) DUs statements under oath that if a patient asked for a female doctor that DU would see them and wait for them to ask DU for a female doctor so they could claim a patient is transphobic. Potentially DU could be guilty of not getting informed consent to examine or carry out medical procedures.

Sounds sensible.

It's a variation on the PC of gender reassignment, where the comparator for a male who is "going through a process of gender reassignment" is a male who isn't. No PC is more important than any other. Each stands on their own merit: sex (male/female - applies to everyone), gender identity belief (yes/no... if "yes" is protected. We already know that "no" is), gender reassignment (yes/no).

one that is overweight, has barely shaved, and applies lipstick like a badly-trained dog

To be fair, my dog would probably do a better makeup job than I do.

I agree.

The courts occasionally make surprising decisions and there is reason to believe the lower courts have been captured, so I can't say with absolute certainty, but I am as certain as it is possible to be that Upton can and should be excluded from the female changing room notwithstanding his belief. The position would be less clear if he had a GRC since the law says that, in that situation, his sex would be that of a woman.

Apologies, you’re right, that comparison was somewhat insulting to dogs, badly-trained or otherwise.

😆

Think you are getting muddled by some of the posts on here, which whilst pertinent to the wider debate have nothing to do with this particular case.

Upton’s belief that he is a woman is a defence to the accusation of sexual harassment.

So in deciding in the allegations against Upton of sexual harassment the judge does not have to test his belief as WORAIDS.

If i am wrong and even if the judge did determine that his belief is a protected belief then that would still not provide, that he could by virtue of his belief enter a women's changing room.

it is IMHO that those who hold a gender identity belief will never seek to have that belief protected because it is too risky for them.

because if they failed it would be game over in law.

Yes, I wasn't referring to the argument in this case as it exists @Bannedontherun, you're right I was speculating about the impact if a belief in gender identity were to be declared WORIADS, and whether in fact that would make any difference to a man's (without a GRC given that with a GRC would be unclear) access to female facilities.

The most brainwashed of gender ideologues also insist that 'gender identity' is not a matter of belief but indisputable reality. So I would be surprised if Upton were to claim his identity is a protected belief.

@KnutsfordCityLimits Fair enough but i think it important for everyone not to confuse the case with wider discussions.

In Forstater there was guidance about the extent of which protected beliefs can be expressed and what the limitations might be. So for example i could not chase Upton’s around the hospital shouting he is a man, that would be harassment.

Equally Upton’s could not enter a women's changing room based on his belief.

Is there any way 'we' could force the issue of whether GI belief is WORIADS? Take it into court somehow? Given what a pp said about no true believer ever wanting or daring to test it in court?
Thank you everyone for threads, comments, analysis etc. It is so much appreciated!

Well i think no because the Equalities Act covers discrimination in employment, goods and services, so one has to complain about being discriminated against on the basis of belief in a court to gain WORAIDS.

going back to what i said the genderists would not risk seeking such a protection in case it failed.

There is no basis on which it could be taken to court just to get a determination. The most likely way for it to end up in court is if someone is discriminated against due to their GI beliefs and they sue.

DU has made his claims in this case under examination by JR and cross examination by NC. He has nothing else to add.

Thanks. Just clutching at sad straws!

The Guardian has actually run an article! https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/feb/25/scottish-government-firmly-backs-single-sex-spaces-amid-equalities-watchdog-warning

DontTellMeWhat2Do

We need to return to not needing any legal definitions for man, woman, male and female because those words are commonly understood to only have one meaning. So much time and money is going to continue to be wasted on lawfare arguing about the meaning of previously commonly understood words...

It's all rather Jarndyce v Jarndyce, isn't it?

Yes.
Didn’t JR bizarrely interrupt at one point to randomly say there were two other trans-identified staff members ( Don’t believe DU had mentioned it), and proudly state so ‘it’s 3 against 1’.
She sounded like a six year old.
Not a legal person, but thought it was odd that a barrister could randomly insert arguments while her client was being X’d that they hadn’t mentioned?
Weird

How very dare she after her previous stance on self ID

Isn’t this like the Christians versus abortion?

Christians are entitled to their beliefs but they’re not permitted to pray within the exclusion zone around a clinic?

What’s the equivalent for pronouns or female only spaces?

currently head of Newcastle Hospitals, is going to take over from Amanda Pritchard as interim head of NHS England. (Is Darlington part of that group?)

No. That's the next county over and a different NHS trust.

Although Upton is mentioned in that article, no pronouns are used for him that I could see. Just his name or 'the doctor'.