Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton, following Employment Tribunal judgment - thread #58

1000 replies

nauticant · 11/12/2025 13:09

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), 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 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.

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 2025 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
Thread 57: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5457132-nhs-fife-tries-to-silence-nurse-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-thread-57 9 December 2025 to 11 December 2025

OP posts:
Thread gallery
58
Alpacajigsaw · 11/12/2025 18:20

yourhairiswinterfire · 11/12/2025 17:02

I typed up the conference in case it's handy for anyone who can't listen.

Sandie:
Thank you all for being here today. I would like to start by firstly thanking Neale Hanvey, who signposted me to Sex Matters. I turned to Neale and Sex Matters because my trade union RCN failed me when I needed them most.

Neale and Maya Forstater of SM supported and encourage me at a very dark time, following my suspension. Maya has been an inspiration and without her and her amazing team at Sex Matters, it is unlikely I would be standing here today.

Maya introduced me to my solicitor, Margaret Gribbon, and it is difficult to put into words how grateful I am to have found someone so determined to fight my corner. Margaret assembled an outstanding legal team by instructing Naomi Cunningham lead counsel and Dr Charlotte Elves junior counsel, whose brilliance exposed the grip gender ideology has on Fife health board, and how they treated me when I spoke the truth about sex.

I thank those who have made it possible for me to pursue my legal case with extraordinary generosity. I would also like to thank they many politicians and women's rights campaigners in Scotland who ensured I never felt alone in this battle, including For Women Scotland, Murray Blackburn Mackenzie, Women Won't Wheesht, Women's Rights Network Scotland, and LGB Alliance. As well as the many grassroots campaigners, many of whom attended my trial here in (?missed) to show their support.

I would like to thank everyone who donated to the crowd funder, set up in my name earlier this year which enabled me to make donations to charities very close to my heart. I have been overwhelmed by the messages of support from NHS colleagues, Scottish Ambulance Service, and from women and men here and abroad of all ages who have sent gifts, cards, and supportive messages. I would also like to thank the Darlington nurses and Christian Concern.

I would also like to thank the Scottish media and Tribunal Tweets, for taking such an interest in my case, and for reporting it to the wider public. Special thanks also to Dr Michael Foran, associate professor of law at University of Oxford, for his astute commentary on my case, and the law in this area.

Above all, I would like to thank my family and friends who have been a tower of strength over the past 2 years. My husband Darren, daughters Nicole and Emma and my mum Sheila, who has been my rock. Thank you all so much, and to my extended family and friends, many of whom are here today.

I must not forget Clare Bloom and volunteers of Women Won't Wheesht for helping organise today's event.

I am not a campaigner, and had never heard of the phrase 'gender critical' when I first raised complaints over 2 years ago about my employers decision to allow men into female-only changing rooms. I just knew instinctively that it wasn't right that women were expected to undress in front of men in private spaces, and I still believe this to be the case.

Whilst I am delighted that the tribunal was critical of Fife health board and found they had harassed me, the judgment I believe falls short in many respects and that is certainly why I won't be giving up this legal fight any time soon, and Margaret will tell you all about that.

Finally, I want to pay tribute to my late dad, who we lost in January, and who I know will be looking down on me feeling proud that he, with my mum, raised a daughter who did not, and will not wheesht.

Margaret Gribbon, Sandie's solicitor:

Fife health board unlawfully harassed Sandie Peggie over a lengthy period of time in 2024 in respect of 4 separate matters. This would be inexcusable for any employer, but particularly so in a large public sector body like NHS Fife. Given the tribunal findings that Fife health board committed multiple breaches of the Equality Act and persistently failed to comply with the tribunal order, my client is dismayed and troubled that senior politicians in Scotland saw fit to repeatedly express their full confidence in Fife health board.

Turning now to the tribunal's substantive findings, some of the findings are hugely problematic. For instance, the judgment places responsibility on female employees to raise complaints if they feel uncomfortable about sharing single-sex spaces with men. This ignores industrial realities. When Sandie objected she was suspended, subjected to an unreasonably lengthy disciplinary investigation, and falsely accused of patient care concerns. It emerged during the hearing that Fife health board then embarked on an archaeological dig to find material to discredit her. It was even suggested to Sandie by Fife health board's KC during her cross examination that she'd lied about having experienced a menstrual flood on Christmas Eve 2023. So against that background, it is difficult to envisage what woman would contemplate raising a complaint of this nature. In many workplaces there is a climate of fear around this issue, exacerbated by the failure of many trade unions, like Sandie's, to advocate for female members who seek to protect their hard won rights to single-sex spaces.

The judgment also places employers in the in(can't hear) position of having to make decisions about singe-sex workplace facilities based on the physical appearance of transgender employees and by asking them intrusive questions.

For these reasons and more, I can confirm that the tribunal's judgment will be appealed, and work on this is already underway. I'm also delighted to tell you that the legal team has been further strengthened by the addition of Ben Cooper KC, who will take the lead on the appeal which will be submitted to the Employment Appeal Tribunal next month. Thank you.

This is great. Thank you.

OpheliaWitchoftheWoods · 11/12/2025 18:20

Good grief, catching up with jaw dropped.

"Sond, Fife have fucked up, and now they've released a bad doc they keep revising and changing...."

"Hold ma beer."

This is plain appalling on multiple fronts.

OpheliaWitchoftheWoods · 11/12/2025 18:21

And while bloody tragic in many ways that the only way for women to get a fair hearing apparently is to send in a man to say it - a real human -

I am sure that Ben and Naomi will make that point.

And many, many, many others.

HermioneWeasley · 11/12/2025 18:23

SirEctor · 11/12/2025 16:27

He's a barrister who has won other high profile cases in the field, notably the Forstater case.

https://oldsquare.co.uk/people/ben-cooper-kc/

And most notably was the KC on Fo Women Scotland. The Supreme Court thanked him in their judgment for the quality of his submissions, which is the judicial equivalent of dropping to their knees and fellating him.

Binglebong · 11/12/2025 18:26

Thank you to everyone on here. I have questions....

Will the witnesses have to appear again?

Given that there was only a transcript for part of the ET will that affect the evidence that the EAT (have I got that right?) can look at? For example, they have to take the ET's "fact" that Upton is more credible but they can't read what was said to see if they agree. And if they don't then what happens?

I'm sure there will be more, still trying to get my head round this.

Mmmnotsure · 11/12/2025 18:27

yourhairiswinterfire · 11/12/2025 17:02

I typed up the conference in case it's handy for anyone who can't listen.

Sandie:
Thank you all for being here today. I would like to start by firstly thanking Neale Hanvey, who signposted me to Sex Matters. I turned to Neale and Sex Matters because my trade union RCN failed me when I needed them most.

Neale and Maya Forstater of SM supported and encourage me at a very dark time, following my suspension. Maya has been an inspiration and without her and her amazing team at Sex Matters, it is unlikely I would be standing here today.

Maya introduced me to my solicitor, Margaret Gribbon, and it is difficult to put into words how grateful I am to have found someone so determined to fight my corner. Margaret assembled an outstanding legal team by instructing Naomi Cunningham lead counsel and Dr Charlotte Elves junior counsel, whose brilliance exposed the grip gender ideology has on Fife health board, and how they treated me when I spoke the truth about sex.

I thank those who have made it possible for me to pursue my legal case with extraordinary generosity. I would also like to thank they many politicians and women's rights campaigners in Scotland who ensured I never felt alone in this battle, including For Women Scotland, Murray Blackburn Mackenzie, Women Won't Wheesht, Women's Rights Network Scotland, and LGB Alliance. As well as the many grassroots campaigners, many of whom attended my trial here in (?missed) to show their support.

I would like to thank everyone who donated to the crowd funder, set up in my name earlier this year which enabled me to make donations to charities very close to my heart. I have been overwhelmed by the messages of support from NHS colleagues, Scottish Ambulance Service, and from women and men here and abroad of all ages who have sent gifts, cards, and supportive messages. I would also like to thank the Darlington nurses and Christian Concern.

I would also like to thank the Scottish media and Tribunal Tweets, for taking such an interest in my case, and for reporting it to the wider public. Special thanks also to Dr Michael Foran, associate professor of law at University of Oxford, for his astute commentary on my case, and the law in this area.

Above all, I would like to thank my family and friends who have been a tower of strength over the past 2 years. My husband Darren, daughters Nicole and Emma and my mum Sheila, who has been my rock. Thank you all so much, and to my extended family and friends, many of whom are here today.

I must not forget Clare Bloom and volunteers of Women Won't Wheesht for helping organise today's event.

I am not a campaigner, and had never heard of the phrase 'gender critical' when I first raised complaints over 2 years ago about my employers decision to allow men into female-only changing rooms. I just knew instinctively that it wasn't right that women were expected to undress in front of men in private spaces, and I still believe this to be the case.

Whilst I am delighted that the tribunal was critical of Fife health board and found they had harassed me, the judgment I believe falls short in many respects and that is certainly why I won't be giving up this legal fight any time soon, and Margaret will tell you all about that.

Finally, I want to pay tribute to my late dad, who we lost in January, and who I know will be looking down on me feeling proud that he, with my mum, raised a daughter who did not, and will not wheesht.

Margaret Gribbon, Sandie's solicitor:

Fife health board unlawfully harassed Sandie Peggie over a lengthy period of time in 2024 in respect of 4 separate matters. This would be inexcusable for any employer, but particularly so in a large public sector body like NHS Fife. Given the tribunal findings that Fife health board committed multiple breaches of the Equality Act and persistently failed to comply with the tribunal order, my client is dismayed and troubled that senior politicians in Scotland saw fit to repeatedly express their full confidence in Fife health board.

Turning now to the tribunal's substantive findings, some of the findings are hugely problematic. For instance, the judgment places responsibility on female employees to raise complaints if they feel uncomfortable about sharing single-sex spaces with men. This ignores industrial realities. When Sandie objected she was suspended, subjected to an unreasonably lengthy disciplinary investigation, and falsely accused of patient care concerns. It emerged during the hearing that Fife health board then embarked on an archaeological dig to find material to discredit her. It was even suggested to Sandie by Fife health board's KC during her cross examination that she'd lied about having experienced a menstrual flood on Christmas Eve 2023. So against that background, it is difficult to envisage what woman would contemplate raising a complaint of this nature. In many workplaces there is a climate of fear around this issue, exacerbated by the failure of many trade unions, like Sandie's, to advocate for female members who seek to protect their hard won rights to single-sex spaces.

The judgment also places employers in the in(can't hear) position of having to make decisions about singe-sex workplace facilities based on the physical appearance of transgender employees and by asking them intrusive questions.

For these reasons and more, I can confirm that the tribunal's judgment will be appealed, and work on this is already underway. I'm also delighted to tell you that the legal team has been further strengthened by the addition of Ben Cooper KC, who will take the lead on the appeal which will be submitted to the Employment Appeal Tribunal next month. Thank you.

Thank you for doing the transcript.

I know at the time some people were a bit underwhelmed by the fact that monies they had donated were being given to charity rather than going to Sandie herself, but listening here it sounded like a brilliant FU to the TRAs - I didn't need that money, this whole thing is fully funded so I'm safe and don't have to worry about it and no one can touch me in that regard. Given that Sandie was still grieving her father (and her mother her husband) when she went to court, I am glad she could donate it in her name to causes that she cares about.

Totallygripped · 11/12/2025 18:29

HermioneWeasley · 11/12/2025 18:23

And most notably was the KC on Fo Women Scotland. The Supreme Court thanked him in their judgment for the quality of his submissions, which is the judicial equivalent of dropping to their knees and fellating him.

Err...Really?

Binglebong · 11/12/2025 18:31

Another one!

If the EAT does decide there was bias and order a retribunal, is that a good or bad thing? There would be even more eyes on it and people would get to speak again (and NC to have a button producing "that wasn't what you said last time" when pressed) but presumably it wouldn't provide precedent while an EAT will. Have I got that anywhere near right?

CriticalConditionUnamendedVersion · 11/12/2025 18:33

Mmmnotsure · 11/12/2025 18:27

Thank you for doing the transcript.

I know at the time some people were a bit underwhelmed by the fact that monies they had donated were being given to charity rather than going to Sandie herself, but listening here it sounded like a brilliant FU to the TRAs - I didn't need that money, this whole thing is fully funded so I'm safe and don't have to worry about it and no one can touch me in that regard. Given that Sandie was still grieving her father (and her mother her husband) when she went to court, I am glad she could donate it in her name to causes that she cares about.

I'm glad too. I welled up when she said she hoped her father was looking down on her, proud of a woman who wouldn't wheesht.

OpheliaWitchoftheWoods · 11/12/2025 18:36

Binglebong · 11/12/2025 18:26

Thank you to everyone on here. I have questions....

Will the witnesses have to appear again?

Given that there was only a transcript for part of the ET will that affect the evidence that the EAT (have I got that right?) can look at? For example, they have to take the ET's "fact" that Upton is more credible but they can't read what was said to see if they agree. And if they don't then what happens?

I'm sure there will be more, still trying to get my head round this.

It's going to be very interesting.

Frankly the sheer fact that it appears to be a judgment written by AI and including fictional parts - now being changed, possibly not entirely legally - and that it is trying to rewrite a Supreme Court Judgment, (possibly that was AI too, such as the invented hoop-jumping that men can go in a single sex space until women complain?)

The whole thing should be binned and started again.

But I suppose we'll see.

MetaCertificateAnnotationsJudgmentFINAL · 11/12/2025 18:38

Binglebong · 11/12/2025 18:26

Thank you to everyone on here. I have questions....

Will the witnesses have to appear again?

Given that there was only a transcript for part of the ET will that affect the evidence that the EAT (have I got that right?) can look at? For example, they have to take the ET's "fact" that Upton is more credible but they can't read what was said to see if they agree. And if they don't then what happens?

I'm sure there will be more, still trying to get my head round this.

So this will be an appeal on law.

NC or BC will say - he decided he needed to balance rights but the SC was clear as day in FWS so he got it wrong on the law.

They then say we will have a hearing on the law and let you know.

In Forstater they said - ET you were so bad, we will do a full do-over.

We are unlikely to get a do-over but we do want it re-assessed properly in light of FWS.

prh47bridge · 11/12/2025 18:39

Binglebong · 11/12/2025 18:26

Thank you to everyone on here. I have questions....

Will the witnesses have to appear again?

Given that there was only a transcript for part of the ET will that affect the evidence that the EAT (have I got that right?) can look at? For example, they have to take the ET's "fact" that Upton is more credible but they can't read what was said to see if they agree. And if they don't then what happens?

I'm sure there will be more, still trying to get my head round this.

No, the witnesses will not appear again. The EAT won't look to see if they agree with the ET that Upton is more credible. That is not their job. They cannot revisit the ET's findings of fact, which includes the credibility of witnesses. They will rule on whether the ET got the law right and, if not, what the outcome should be. The only way the witnesses have to appear again is if the EAT decides the ET was biased and sends the whole case back to be heard by a different judge and panel.

MyThreeWords · 11/12/2025 18:40

The Guardian seems to have begun a whole new career of actually reporting on trans-related issues, rather than rehearsing activist talking points.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/dec/11/nurse-to-appeal-against-hugely-problematic-trans-changing-room-ruling

This new leaf seems to have coincided with the BBC upping its game following the leaked memo.

#Gladtimes.

Fife nurse to appeal against ‘hugely problematic’ trans changing room ruling

Sandie Peggie won harassment claim but tribunal dismissed claims of discrimination and victimisation

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/dec/11/nurse-to-appeal-against-hugely-problematic-trans-changing-room-ruling

SirEctor · 11/12/2025 18:42

prh47bridge · 11/12/2025 18:39

No, the witnesses will not appear again. The EAT won't look to see if they agree with the ET that Upton is more credible. That is not their job. They cannot revisit the ET's findings of fact, which includes the credibility of witnesses. They will rule on whether the ET got the law right and, if not, what the outcome should be. The only way the witnesses have to appear again is if the EAT decides the ET was biased and sends the whole case back to be heard by a different judge and panel.

Do you think there is any chance of the last possibility, that the EAT would find the ET to have been biased?

MarieDeGournay · 11/12/2025 18:43

Mmmnotsure · 11/12/2025 18:27

Thank you for doing the transcript.

I know at the time some people were a bit underwhelmed by the fact that monies they had donated were being given to charity rather than going to Sandie herself, but listening here it sounded like a brilliant FU to the TRAs - I didn't need that money, this whole thing is fully funded so I'm safe and don't have to worry about it and no one can touch me in that regard. Given that Sandie was still grieving her father (and her mother her husband) when she went to court, I am glad she could donate it in her name to causes that she cares about.

I don't remember anybody feeling underwhelmed about money being given to charity, but maybe I missed it.

In what was I think the first case of 'Synchronised Donating', we made many donations to the charity that Sandie's family mentioned on the memorial page for her father, RIP, i.e. the Scottish Society for Rheumatology. So many that that year's accounts must have looked amazing!

In contrast there was a crowdfunder for 'treats' for Beth...

prh47bridge · 11/12/2025 18:44

SirEctor · 11/12/2025 18:42

Do you think there is any chance of the last possibility, that the EAT would find the ET to have been biased?

It depends whether SP's legal team choose to argue it. If they do, this judgement is so poor that I think there is a chance they would succeed.

CriticalConditionUnamendedVersion · 11/12/2025 18:48

I'm not sure what the test is for finding an ET to be biased. Something along the lines of 'no impartial tribunal could have come to this conclusion'? That's a pretty high bar to reach but not impossible. And I don't know how an EAT can reach that conclusion without re- examining the evidence itself.
I'm sure someone with expertise can comment more helpfully.

ETA Maybe an appearance of bias is enough as in the principles surrounding recusal? So if there is something to suggest the tribunal was biased, even if there is no evidence it actually was, that's enough because even the appearance of bias damages public confidence in the impartiality of our legal institutions.

Lovaduck74 · 11/12/2025 18:49

Instructions · 11/12/2025 17:21

The young men of Reddit are petulant indeed tonight

I need to stay here surrounded by intelligent, witty women who teach me something new every time I visit and not waste my evening arguing with them

I always try to put in my mind they are pigeons. Try to play chess with one and it will get up, kick everything over, poop all over the board and declare itself the winner. There is no discussion to be had with a pigeon

AskingQuestionsAllTheTime · 11/12/2025 18:49

WearyAuldWumman
Who the fck imagines that a middle-aged woman would lie about flooding?*

A man who fetishises about showing teenage girls how to insert a tampon?

Mmmnotsure · 11/12/2025 18:50

MarieDeGournay · 11/12/2025 18:43

I don't remember anybody feeling underwhelmed about money being given to charity, but maybe I missed it.

In what was I think the first case of 'Synchronised Donating', we made many donations to the charity that Sandie's family mentioned on the memorial page for her father, RIP, i.e. the Scottish Society for Rheumatology. So many that that year's accounts must have looked amazing!

In contrast there was a crowdfunder for 'treats' for Beth...

I don't remember if that reaction was on MNet, but it was certainly mentioned elsewhere.

Oh god, yes, treats for Theo, poor love 🙄

The SSR is a tiny charity, as you know, so that would have been quite the thing for them.

eatfigs · 11/12/2025 18:50

I'm not sure what the point is of appealing. The tribunal found against NHS Fife on the harassment claim. Their policy has been changed so changing rooms are single-sex. What's left?

frenchnoodle · 11/12/2025 18:51

prh47bridge · 11/12/2025 18:44

It depends whether SP's legal team choose to argue it. If they do, this judgement is so poor that I think there is a chance they would succeed.

I can't remember as it was so long ago and I've view others since, this was the judge that called Upton "The victim" accidently wasn't it, clearly showing bias?

EweProfessorSurnameDoctorProfessor · 11/12/2025 18:53

eatfigs · 11/12/2025 18:50

I'm not sure what the point is of appealing. The tribunal found against NHS Fife on the harassment claim. Their policy has been changed so changing rooms are single-sex. What's left?

Alessandra Asteriti, an academic lawyer, has tweeted similar. That it’s all pointless unless gender as a concept is removed from the law altogether.

borntobequiet · 11/12/2025 18:53

ProfMummBRaaarrrTheEverLeaking · 11/12/2025 17:28

From the BBC news story about the appeal.

I'm sure Sandie has said she DIDN'T reference Isla Bryson?!?! The way that story reads is as if she talked about Bryson, by name, to Upton in the changing room!

In fact I think that Upton, in a fit of unaccustomed truthfulness, confirmed that she didn’t.
I will check on TT.

guinnessguzzler · 11/12/2025 18:54

Thanks so much to you all for your comments and information sharing. I'm finding it hard to keep up at the moment for various reasons but following as best I can. It's always great to have all the insight and wisdom so easily found on here.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread