NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #52

[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 resumed on 16 July and the last day of evidence was 29 July 2025. It resumed again over 1 to 2 September for closing submissions.

The hearing commenced with Sandie Peggie giving evidence. Dr Beth Upton gave evidence from Thursday 6 February to Wednesday 12 February 2025. Sandie Peggie returned to give more evidence on 29 July 2025.

Access to view the second part of the hearing remotely was obtainable by sending an email request to [email protected] by 5pm on Wednesday 9 July. Detailed instructions were provided here:
drive.google.com/file/d/16-9POEZ7yHWUr6EmbfquJZO18Gv78bSm/view

The hearing is being live tweeted by x.com/tribunaltweets and there's additional information here: tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/peggie-vs-fife-health-board-and-dr-005 and tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/peggie-vs-fife-health-board-and-dr-bd6. 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.ph/WSSjg.

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

Links to previous threads #1 to #50 can be found in this thread: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5379717-sandie-peggie-list-of-threads-covering-employment-tribunal-and-afterwards

Thread 51: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5402652-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-51 1 September 2025 to 2 September 2025

Not in my experience.

See some images here.

Edited to try to get the link to stay there. If it still doesn't work, google "images taffeta dresses".

Would have been improved with a large diamond necklace, but the expanse of bare neck gave more “innocent to the slaughter” vibes.

Do you think, perhaps in retrospect, that was a deliberate decision on someone's part?

I think you don't get to KC level without knowing full well your amendments need to be in before the 11th hour, there is almost certainly some underhanded tactics being played here.

That's what I am wondering...is the basis of any future appeal that JR failed to represent the interests of at least one of her two clients? I am thinking back to that Times article from July that suggested there was an emerging conflict of interest in JR representing Upton and Fife, once Fife's own processes had cleared Sandie.

"Is top lawyer in Sandie Peggie tribunal facing a conflict of interest?"
https://archive.ph/pr1jL

By their own KC? I doubt it!

Re. the absence of evidence, is anyone else reminded of Hitchen's razor?

'What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence'

JR deliberately sacrificing her professional reputation for The Cause by making a hames of the tribunal, and wearing all white today to symbolise surrender?
Anything is possible!🙃

It is true that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. However, neither is it evidence of what the claimant/respondent needs to prove. As I understand it, the point raised by JR was that the doctor not remembering whether Sandie called her a P**i would not be evidence that it did not happen. However, if part of NHS Fife's defense is that Sandy is a racist, they would need to prove that. In that case, I don't see how the absence of evidence helps them since they are the side that needs to produce evidence on that point.

However, the trier of fact can assess each of the witnesses' credibility. They can choose to believe the doctor or not, same with any other witness. They might decide that it is likely that the doctor is covering for Sandy (though that would be evidence that Sandy is probably not the horrible meanie that JR says and that she does have support within the NHS Fife staff).

I'm playing catch up as gave this morning's session a swerve not fancying listening to JR again. Sounds like it was an interesting session and we're now on a cliffhanger?

What I don't understand is how this is different to what they have argued before?

But how much of the incompetence was down to non disclosure of information to their own legal team? JR got blindsided a few times when additional information kept being found

The problem with the "Bananarama defence" is that I am pretty certain that none of the witnesses mentioned any of this bad behaviour. Wasn't it a 30 year unblemished record and "only 1 complaint"? I feel confident that Upton would have updated his little phone notes if he'd heard to the contrary or the last two witnesses would have dobbed her in.

They didn’t previously argue that SP had a right to object to men in the CR but the issue was that the way she expressed those beliefs put her outside the law and entitled NHSF to act against her.

If they don’t argue that (even in the alternative) the court can’t find that.

if they had argued that, NC would have conducted her examinations and cross examinations differently.

Process is punishment.

So the Neverending Court Case is the way to go. It's purgatory.

Poor Big Sond has retired so another judge is now rehearing the case in 2040 after JR has changed the goal posts for the 69th time. Some of the witnesses have died so their evidence can not be considered again because they can't be cross examined again.

Panel back

Not to mention the famous Friday afternoon press release.

I don't think there's a problem with Countess Russell's basic competence, because she's a KC and doesn't come cheap, but any barrister knows that sometimes you get a client who just can't be helped.

I have no information as to whether NHS Fife's legal team is made up of drunk hamsters, but I have my suspicions.

In the meantime the law has changed, we are no longer in the ECHR and men are indeed men but the law as it stood at the time of the incident remains relevant to the case.

It's all about harassment and persecution of SP in any way possible.

No sound

We are still subject to the jurisdiction of the ECHR.

NC talking

About timings, and Sandie being caused further upset and anxiety

As I understand it, the point raised by JR was that the doctor not remembering whether Sandie called her a P**i would not be evidence that it did not happen.

So the claim here is that SP called a doctor P**i whilst in conversation with them and the doctor does not remember it happening but a third part does?

It does not seem credible that a doctor would hear a subordinate nurse use such a universally offensive term and not remember the conversation at all.

I hope Sandie isn't dialled into this shitshow and is enjoying a nice cocktail by the pool. She can catch up later on.

Fife did say Sandie harassed Upton - they've argued it before. They've just got spooked by Naomi saying she wouldnt deal with Higgs because they were not arguing on that point.

Oh dear.