NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #53

[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].

The hearing was 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: 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
Thread 52: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5403218-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-52 2 September 2025 to 4 September 2025

Thank you for sharing this. Sodha is an exceptionally clear thinker and communicator and she is so right to highlight this.

@Retiredfromthere:

“@KnottyAuty and the rest of the audit team should be able to tell us how many trusts could end up fighting the same case if staff decide to take it to a tribunal. I think its <insert number of every Scottish Health Trust>.”

Try <insert number of every trust in Scotland, England, Wales and NI>.

I don't know, but I presume the delay was due to legal challenges and the extended consultation period.

I think it was due to getting thousands of responses to the consultation and having to make some kind of attempt to read and understand.

(how many fecking consultations does it take? We know what the public think. We know what feminists think. We know what stonewall think. Neither government nor EHRC can please everyone.)

It's the updated Code of Practice and must be laid before Parliament for 40 days after ministerial approval. Then it will be published.

I don't know how long the minister has to approve it, but it can't be laid before Parliament until the recess is over on 13 October. The 40 days then takes it to 25 November. And 40 days could be working days which would mean 8 December.

Following ministerial approval, the UK Government must lay the draft code before Parliament for 40 days before it can be brought into force.

https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/media-centre/equality-law-regulator-submits-updated-code-practice-minister-women-and-equalities#:~:text=%E2%80%9CWe%20have%20now%20submitted%20an,sections%20impacted%20by%20the%20ruling.

I believe it will be either an affirmative approval where Parliament will agree or disagree or a negative approval where if Parliament doesn't vote it will automatically come into force.

As the government has a stonking majority and this is a legal matter, I would expect it to be a three line whip to approve it (which means Labour MPs must vote in favour). I can't see Starmer expecting anything less because he's a lawyer and will follow the law.

There may be some Labour MPs who will vote against, and I expect the LibDems and Greens will also vote against, but the Tories and Reform will also back it.

It'll be interesting to see how Corbyn/Sultana's lot vote.

As far as I am aware there is no time limit for ministerial approval.

The 40 days is elapsed days, not working days. However, the clock stops ticking if both houses of parliament are not sitting for more than 4 days.

The Code of Practice is subject to the negative procedure, which means it is automatically approved after 40 days unless either house stops it.

Three-line whips are used for major events such as the second reading of a significant bill. There is no way a three-line whip would be used for this, even if there is an attempt to block it. However, as this is subject to the negative procedure, it is unlikely that there will be any vote.

It's the updated Code of Practice and must be laid before Parliament for 40 days after ministerial approval. Then it will be published.
Oh sorry, I thought someone was asking about EHRC's being slower than expected in getting a draft to the minister.

I think there will be ructions if it's not laid before parliament very soon after the end of the recess.

14 in Scotland
210 in England
sorry don’t have the number of Welsh & NI Trusts to hand…

Wales is rather different with only three NHS Trusts, including Public Health Wales, and seven Health Boards:

https://www.gov.wales/nhs-wales-health-boards-and-trusts

I do love the depth of knowledge on here.

New Herald article on Scot Gov covering up legal advice requested in an FOI; https://archive.is/GsEPk

Hahaha! I think it's right that ""Disclosure of deliberative material risks inhibiting the willingness of officials to offer frank and honest views" especially while the tribunal is ongoing.

But it's also hilarious that the decision to share counsel with Upton meant that JR was then limited to the extent that advice to either party could be advised freely and frankly. The whole thing is a self-inflicted mess.

The whole thing is a self-inflicted mess

As it was from August to the Christmas changing room incident, and continued to be during January, and then again until Sandie's first solicitor letter, and, well, pretty much every day after that - even before NHS Fife had even heard of Jane Russell.

Sorry this has been answered, but if they find against Fife, but not Upton (as people seem to think is likely) then I assume he has no way of making them appeal? If he himself has been ‘cleared’?

I can't see how he can be cleared. He made serious allegations against SP with respect to patient care and it is more likely than not that he falsified his notes in order to do that. It's harassment of her.

He also alleged that she had harassed him and probably falsified his notes to show that.

His behaviour in the changing room on Christmas Eve in arguing with her, however politely, only stopped when he forced her to agree to report it. Which she already had done.

His behaviour has been appalling.

Upton cannot force Fife to appeal in any circumstances. Even if the tribunal decides against both Fife and Upton, Upton cannot force Fife to appeal. All he can do is decide whether he wants to appeal if the tribunal comes down against hiim on some or all of the issues.

Although Foran thinks Upton will appeal if he loses, because of his career, I'm not sure. He cannot really salvage it, can he?

Is it possible that JR did the ridiculously last minute amendment with appeals in mind. a) to count at least a partial victory, and b) with the prospect of being able to separate the two parties and only represent Fife at the next stage. It's just so weird after all these months.

Sad times ahead for Dr Upton. Sad, sad times.

Will we know the verdict before Christmas do you think?

If Upton loses and appeals, if he then loses the appeal would the judgement then become case law(if that’s the correct term)? So other biological males refusing to leave the female changing room will be found to be harassing women?
Can any legal people confirm please?

6 Trusts in NI if you include the ambulance one, the country is split into 5 Health and Social Care Trusts. Plus the Public Health Agency, similar to Public Health Wales. Things like HR and IT are shared services across all health organisations, which means that all the Trusts and agencies will have more or less identical policies. Apparently, they don't have one on how to deal with transgender patients, but certainly staff EDI training has been TWAW.

Not a legal person.

I am just wondering anyone thinks Upton may be flattered into appealing if he receives an offer to back an appeal on any grounds that can be picked out of the, as yet unknown, judgement.

He hasn't made any wise decisions so far. And yet he has maintained support within his community, against the odds. So I am wondering if he may be susceptible by offers of support from one or another of the grift law projects out there.

A judgement of an Employment Tribunal is not binding on other employment tribunals.

A judgement of the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) sets a precedent which is binding on employment tribunals. The precedent can only be overturned by the higher courts (the Court of Appeal or the Supreme Court) or, in some circumstances, by another EAT.

If the losing side in this case appeals to the EAT, the judgement of the EAT will be binding on employment tribunals. However, the EAT judgement will NOT be binding on the criminal or civil courts.

If the EAT decides that Upton was harassing SP by being in the women's changing room, that decision would be binding on Employment Tribunals faced with claims from women who have found men in their changing rooms at work. However, it would not guarantee that a case in the civil or criminal courts based on the same facts would succeed.

Thank you for that explanation @prh47bridge
So if Upton appeals and loses he will set a precedent for all future employment tribunals!