NHS Fife tries to silence nurse - Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton - thread #57

[nauticant]

Judgment was handed down on 8 December 2025:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6936ce28a6fc97b81e57436a/S_Peggie_v_Fife_Health_Board__Dr_Upton.pdf

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
Thread 53: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5404208-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-53 3 September to 1 October 2025
Thread 54: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5418690-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-54 28 September 2025 to 21 November 2025
Thread 55: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5447019-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-55 19 November 2025 to 8 December 2025
Thread 56: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5456749-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-56 8 December 2025 to 9 December 2025

Did someone say NC was going to be doing a press release shortly?

I INVOKE MY ARTICLE 8 RIGHTS

On a t-shirt, in all sizes to fit every women

Tomorrow, according to the Telegraph, SP and her legal team will hold a press conference. Don't know when or which member(s) of her legal team.

I can't see that bit of the jigsaw.

Suggested links come from what Twitter thinks it knows about you. I don't see any connection via SK.

Is it possible to see what Vic Valentine wrote? Was that the origin of some of these selective/fictitious quotes that Judge Kemp relied upon?I

Reflecting that it is because of Tribunal Tweets and remote viewing that we know what went on in the courtroom during the public part of proceedings. We don't know what was for Judges ears and eyes only.

Whilst I would agree, the tribunal was entitled to take a different view. The question really was whether his claim to be a biological woman in and of itself undermined his account of what happened in the changing room. Personally, my view is that the fact the alleged clinical safety incidents either didn't happen or were not as described should have been enough to brand him an unreliable witness.

Yes, absolutely.

In the replies to that someone finds another non-existent quote - the Ashers one at para 793

Fucking hell.

The judge is an actual idiot.

Can't wait for the response from the Peggie legal team on this. Blistering and fuelled by rage.

I don't post on twitter myself, but generally when I look at certain people's threads ( JK Rowling, Julie Bindel, Sex Matters etc) the links are always linked in nature to those posters...so I get a link for Helen Joyce, James Esses etc

Barristers and solicitors have been warned that giving fake quotes, often AI generated, is grossly unprofessional and a significant ethical breach. For a judge to give fake quotes is inexcusable. Just one would be bad, but two made up quotes to support the tribunal's position undermines the whole judgement in my view.

To my mind The judge always seemed a bit tardy and a bit tetchy during the hearing. Often late or keen to get off early, and quite keen to point out how "things were done in Scotland" ( as opposed to England where NC came from).

I am speculating here. NC asked that SK address all the points the claimant made in his judgement which he did, that is at a guess why it is so long.

NC was already alerted to potential bias, which she did complain about, the transcripts will serve her well in that regard.

I suspect there will be an appeal that seeks a re trial.

Given not only the numerous errors in law, the misquotes of FWS and Forstarter, the absurdities such as no evidence that men are a greater risk.

And the grand finale of making up new rules that flies in the face of the SC ruling.

I cannot see any other way forward.

SDurely it's all about hanging on to his job?

How common is in a judgment for quotations are not to be meticulously attributed by line and paragraph number?

I don't remember seeing unattributed quotes before, anywhere in a judicially sourced document. But, it might be like the wallpaper - you don't see or not see it until someone draws attention to it.

Wow. Not been in here for a few months and amazed to see we’re now up to 57,000 comments on this case. Have been following on Twitter. The vast majority of people commenting on the judgement are lay people who have a far better understanding of the Supreme Court judgement than the judge in this tribunal.

The judgement is jaw-droppingly muddled, confused, illogical and even offensive in places. Roll on the appeal.

The judge should always address all the points made by both sides in the judgement. Failure to do so leaves their decision open to appeal.

I would always expect any quote from another judgement to give the paragraph number. I cannot recall seeing such a quote without a paragraph number before. I wouldn't like to say definitively that it never happens, but it is certainly not normal. And, where you are only quoting part of a paragraph from a previous judgement, it is normal to include an ellipsis to show that you've missed one or more words, whereas, in at least one instance, this judgement misses a word from a previous judgement without any indication that it has done so.

I was thinking an appeal, to a higher court on points of law, initially, but the latest developments surely point to a retrial at this point? You surely can’t just invent citations?

Has anything like this ever happened before?
I’ve seen reports of hallucinated case law from a solicitor, but not a judge?

This may just be me, being ridiculous, but is anyone else mourning slightly the loss of Big Sond? I loved reading along, with all the astute things said, and actually to hear his judgement makes me feel so sad.

Yeah, it's disappointing to find out he's just another sad little man. Not My Sond.

Re the 'but Europe.. ' argument, Sweden is the only European country where unisex loos are more common than single sex ones.

Not My Sond either. What an odious twerp. I want to hear the Fifer’s take down of Big Sond’s judgement!