NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #25

[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
Thread 22: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5280174-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-22
Thread 23: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5285690-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-23
Thread 24: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5301295-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-24

You are under pressure to accept any reasonable offer. If you don't, and then the courts award you similar or less - you are liable for the other side's costs.

Costs are ultimately at the discretion of the court. So while there are rules and conventions governing costs there is a lot of leeway within those for the court to award costs in a way they think is just.

I'm not sure of the position in Scotland but in England and Wales the general rule in employment tribunals is that the parties bear their own costs, win or lose. Unless there is an element of being vexatious or unreasonable. So if Fife settles and Upton refuses and loses he could find himself liable to pay not only his own costs and damages but a portion of Sandie's costs too.

Thanks for new thread!

I feel she’s entitled to have her name cleared in public. This has been nothing short of a witch-hunt.

I agree.

This^
But I totally understand if she just wanted to settle.
I would hope any settlement includes a return to her A&E posts and suspension of any staff who object to working with her!

Employment tribunals are supposed to be available to employees without legal representation and guidance is that they would only award costs where a claimant proceeded to trial with a vexatious claim and lost. Even then costs awards against the losing party would usually be limited to £5,000. This is fact. Therefore SP is at no financial risk from the other party in continuing her case. If they withdraw then she can go ahead and present her evidence uncontested after which the judge will rule on the case. It may be that she is offered a huge financial settlement plus her legal fees paid too. In this case she would have to consult with her financial backer based on their agreement to decide if this is the best way forward. The award of costs works both ways so if they continue they will likely only recover around £5,000 of their legal costs if they won.

Query if some of the things said about her might even constitute defamation. But I’m not an expert in that area.

Thank you for that explanation @Notaboutme11

He tried to ruin her 30 year unblemished career. If it were me I’d want to end his!

She may be liable for their costs from that point if she refuses a reasonable offer to settle, yes. It isn't guaranteed that she would be, and the definition of what constitutes a reasonable offer is very fact dependent. But there is that risk if NHS Fife make a good offer.

No. NHS Fife can settle with SP and leave Upton to fight on if they wish. He doesn't have to settle just because they do, and he cannot stop them from settling if they wish and SP agrees.

For good public policy reasons there is no liability for defamatory statements uttered in court. They attract absolute privilege which is a complete defence.

Refusing to accept a reasonable offer is viewed as unreasonable conduct, so that is one of the situations where you can be liable for some of the other side's costs.

I'm not rubbing my hands in gleeful expectation.

I am. I sound like a cricket.

This. Also, statements made to NHS Fife and regulatory bodies would qualify for qualified privilege. People with concerns have to be able to register them without fearing the consequences. Where qualified privilege applies, you have to show that the statements were made out of malice rather than out of a genuine concern for patient safety. It is easy for us to look at the history of this case and say that the allegations are malicious. Proving it to the standard required in court is another matter.

But would the standard be enough for Fifes own internal investigation to prove he made the allegations maliciously?
Mind you we now all know how competent they are with these things!

it is highly unlikely that this would be the case.

Apologies if this has already been mentioned, but Sandie's daughter shared a message from her mother about the charities to which she was donating all the money that had been raised for her:

https://x.com/nicoleepeggiee/status/1913283364691357778

They are good charities, so I'm glad they're receiving funding, though I do sort of wish she'd chosen something like a domestic abuse refuge or women's rights charity, which would have been in the spirit of the donations.

Anyway. I think we can deduce that Sandie's case is backed by a generous funder (mentioning no names) and she can probably afford to take the fight as far as she wants.

Tribunal cost awards against losing party are both limited and rare. None can be forced to settle out of court.

I guess I was pondering more the contemporaneous statements made around the hospital: the email from KS, things said around the staffrooms/corridors. It sounded as if SP was persona non grata among those who had drunk the Kool Aid and they were quite vocal about it. But yeah. It was more an idle musing from me!

I think that the choice of charities indicate that Sandie is just a regular woman who decided to say "no". I rather like that😊

I have never said otherwise, simply pointed out that there are risks in refusing to settle.

I wonder if they are paying his costs though?

If so can they withdraw the offer of paying costs at any point?