NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #26

[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 doubtful whether pubilc access for remote viewing would be reinstated but recent developments (as of mid May) suggest that this might actually become available again.

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
Thread 25: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5318518-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-25

@prh47bridge Are they allowed to tell us or are they supposed not to say anything?

@anyolddinosaur - That is up to the judge. Of course, the participants may decide that they don't want to say anything publicly even if the judge hasn't prevented them from doing so.

There used to be part of company law which meant that it was possible to sue directors who behaved either unethically or idiotically (wrongful trading/fraudulent trading Companies Act 1985 I think but IANAL). It was almost never used, which is a pity. Is there equivalent legislation over the behaviour of public sector boards/directors?

It is actually the Insolvency Act 1986 that creates the civil offences of wrongful trading and fraudulent trading. If a director is guilty of either offence, they can be made liable for some or all of the company's debts. They may also be disqualified from acting as a director.

The nearest equivalent for the public sector is the offence of misfeasance in public office, which is also a civil offence allowing the individual to be forced to pay compensation. There is also the criminal offence of misconduct in public office, which carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.

However, nice as it would be to see those involved at NHS Fife being forced to repay the legal costs, I don't think that would be a good idea. The obvious next step would be to make doctors, surgeons and nurses personally liable for any compensation awarded in medical negligence claims, which would not be good for patients.

Interesting comments
https://www.reddit.com/r/transgenderUK/comments/1kxlnfv/a_message_of_kindness_and_thanks_from_dr_beth/

I'm struggling to believe that the NHS is really stuck for cash

https://archive.ph/WZwYI

www.spectator.co.uk/article/nhs-trust-offers-support-sessions-over-supreme-court-ruling/

Sandie donated her ten-times-larger gift to charity; Upton is keeping half for himself.

Says it all, really.

Now, now, @teawamutu - Dr Beth Upton's was a message of "kindness and thanks", in the face of the "transphobic nurse". I think we can all agree as he reminds us, "We must not forget that the rights we do have have been hard fought for and we must continue to fight for those rights and for the rights of others."

And as one of the comments points out, "She and her wife sound brave, sweet and noble both."

[Interestingly, he intends to divide the money "roughly into two" - whatever that means. Perhaps there is a penny out? Or perhaps not.]

You're quite right, @Mmmnotsure , I stand corrected.

It's entirely right and fair that poor lovely Dr Beth and his handmaid wife receive some financial recompense for travel, accommodation and counselling.

Sandie Peggie has none of these costs and a far more munificent nurse's salary and no kids or elderly parents...

This is interesting information obtained via FOI on the extent of financial cover NHS Fife have from their liability protection set up:

https://x.com/sexmattersorg/status/1928020450766123076?s=46

“EXCLUSIVE: FOI by @justinbowie1997 for @thecourieruk reveals that the highest sum NHS Fife will have to pay the nurse at the centre of the trans row employment tribunal, if she wins her case, is £25,000. If Ms Peggie is to be awarded more than £25,000, the rest of the money will come from a national risk scheme designed to protect NHS boards from heavy losses.”

£25k is the limit to how much compensation SP may be awarded covered, but I’m not sure if the ET has any upper limit on how much they can award. Potentially, whoever is making the decisions on legal strategy is placing the trust at risk of not being covered for whatever the outcome/potential award that SP may be entitled to.

So much of this is pointing to people in charge being both captured & incompetent to an alarming degree. The sort of incompetence that shouldn’t enjoy the support of the Health Minister (as he stated when this all started to unravel via cross examination).

Actually, I’ve read that wrong. The trust will have to pay the 1st £25k but anything above that is covered by the scheme.

On the face of it, I wouldn’t object to the donations going towards any Upton costs given we know that Sandie has a generous backer. It seems a fair thing for their supporters to do considering we garden for similar purposes.

The message is rather performative though in its “we must think of others” messaging. Given Dr Upton’s approach to reality and science, I would be very interested to know what proportion they decide is “roughly” half of the money.

The comments are, as ever, mind boggling. I like the one that said it was Sandie’s team with the delaying tactics that caused the hearing drag on. Up really is down with them.

The comments are, as ever, mind boggling. I like the one that said it was Sandie’s team with the delaying tactics that caused the hearing drag on. Up really is down with them.

Where 'delaying tactics' = insisting NHS Fife and DU comply with their disclosure requirements. 🙄

I do hope that NC was able to convince the ET to allow access to DU's phone. 🤞

“Travel and accommodation” costs?

They live in Fife and the Tribunal is in Dundee. The train journey from Kirkcaldy is under 40mins and an anytime return is £32 if you don’t want to buy super advance and shave off £10. The train station in Dundee is literally next to the building where the Tribunal is being held.

Unless of course they’ve decided to book 2 weeks in the Malmaison in Dundee for the next stint which might add up to the £2k costs mentioned.

Or they’ve realised they’ll need the money to pay for their share of the Tribunal award. In which case maybe they’ll need all of it…

The comments on that Reddit thread don’t seem to be understanding the facts of the case and that it’s Upton who delayed proceedings by refusing to disclose evidence…

https://www.nss.nhs.scot/legal/clinical-negligence-and-other-risks-indemnity-scheme-cnoris/guide-to-the-clinical-negligence-and-other-risks-indemnity-scheme-cnoris/

I read it that any NHS Trust has to fund the first £25k of any claim in the 12 month “financial year”. Scotgov then covers costs out of its reserves in that year and then reclaims it from the CNORIS fund. The CNORIS members have to pay in to cover the shared liability and payments are varied where Trusts are responsible for higher claims. This stops trusts having to keep large reserves - sort of like a hire purchase scheme for bad debt?

So all the cost will fall on the public purse even if it’s diverted through different organisations.

Re costs due and awardable.

My understanding is that Upton's court costs, and any damages awarded, will be paid by the trust. So it really is only the train fare from Fife and some lunches.

Awards in employment tribunals are almost always only enough to cover the direct financial detriment (so in this case things like lost unsocial hours payments and corresponding pension contributions). If the respondent has behaved particularly badly, court costs can also be awarded (funnily enough, this does seem to be happening a fair bit in GC cases....)

They have to have done something truly egregious for punitive damages to be awarded.

Awards in employment tribunals are almost always only enough to cover the direct financial detriment (so in this case things like lost unsocial hours payments and corresponding pension contributions). If the respondent has behaved particularly badly, court costs can also be awarded (funnily enough, this does seem to be happening a fair bit in GC cases....)

There's an award for injury to feeling in discrimination cases as well. The amount depends on the seriousness of the harassment and injury to feelings.

I love that media are now asking questions about costs. I wonder if a journalist might like to try to add up what GI has cost the taxpayer payer so far

There can also be a sum for aggravated damages in discrimination cases, but this is unusual.

We might need a stadium ...

Didn't Allison Bailey get aggravated damages? I may be misremembering.

@NoWordForFluffy Allison Bailey did get aggravated damages as well as (most unusually) costs!

£20k was awarded for cost due to Garden Court’s ‘unreasonable behaviour during the hearing’!

not quite enough imo!

I'd consider aggravated damages appropriate for a case where the defendants
failed to comply with disclosure requirements and fought not to comply. That increased the time necessary and the pressure on Sandie. What's that comment about justice delayed is justice denied? Deliberate delay should be penalised.

I was thinking this earlier, but hadn't got round to posting it!