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

[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), 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

Probably me, I'm probably using the wrong term (and thank you for correcting me). You get the logic, though.

There have been a further two Certificates of Correction issued this morning.

Posting without comment.

And the second.

They'll have a lot of difficulty drafting something clear and coherent, and there will be a lot of scrutiny.

Three and counting - Big Sond wants to beat Fife for most real time edits of a bat shit piece of work

@Keeptoiletssafe

I have a close male relative with a stoma and, to my shame, it never occurred to me that, of course, they need facilities to sort out their bag when at work/out and about.

It's just reminded me that at an Airport in Spain (Alicante, I think, not Malaga, lol) there are separate disabled loos for male and female and each has a picture on the respective door of a figure with a stoma bag. Making it clear that they are entitled to use the disabled.

look more closely!

How many of these certificats of corrections are we likely to see?

Quite. 😂

"Hold my beer."

Fucksake! 😂

Have a closer look!

of the type that Myrtle posted, could be hundreds given how creative people can be on the Internet.

Any link to source or better quality? 🙏

Or sue for defamation?

On page 29, finally caught up, have missed 2, yes 2, advent choccies and still in Jim jams. Having given serious thought to all the posts, TT, legal jargon(thanks to all posters) etc as my aged brain will allow I have come to this conclusion on the basis of taking Occam’s Razor to Schrödinger’s Cat’s Gordian Knot of SSS’ rights. Popping on a bit of lippy, pan stick ( showing my age) coyly undressing feminine attire, softening voice, bursting into tears when a mere actual woman has the temerity to say no does not infer the right to the spaces reserved for the opposite sex to one’s self. The SCJ says so even if you choose to disapprove or disbelieve. 300 pages, hours of testimony not always truthful or convincing, anxiety and sheer ignorance and incompetence of those in esteemed authority and where are we, 3 steps forward 2 steps back…but then every journey starts with a single step…this however you see it is that single step.

It’s not a good thing, but referring to Pakistanis and ethnic Pakistanis by that diminutive is so endemic as to be practically universal across a lot of central Scotland, outside the chattering classes.

As many have said, to the effect of: “Why shouldn’t you call me that? I am a P*.”

Those bad taste jokes about foreign disasters, some managing to be more unfunny than offensive, are also so common that you could not staff a hospital if you excluded everyone who told/shared/liked them.

If Sandie Peggie is a racist on that evidence, then the ET is saying normal Fife people are racist.

I am of the chattering classes and I shun those jokes and names for people, if that matters to anyone.

Having read that, it seems bias does not provide grounds for a complaint of misconduct. It is instead a matter for appeal. I'm astonished.

My bolding in the extract below.

...complaints can only be accepted if they contain a specific allegation of behaviour that, if true, could result in a finding of misconduct. The list below contains examples of the more common types of correspondence and allegations received by the JCIO which do not fall within the remit of the judicial complaints procedure (they are instead matters for an appeal):

• The terms of a judgment, decision or case management order reached by an Employment Judge or Employment Tribunal panel.
• Bias in the decision-making of a judge or panel.
• How a judge has managed a case, e.g., allowing one party to speak for longer than another, refusing to allow a witness to give evidence or admit certain documents, appearing to react more favourably to one person’s evidence than another’s, directing that a hearing take place in private, and what adjustments have or have not been made to enable a person to participate in a hearing.
• A judge saying that they do not believe a person’s evidence, questioning a person’s credibility or honesty, or criticising a person’s actions.
• A judge making an error of law or procedure.
• A judge making an incorrect order or refusing to make an order.
• A judge not reading documents before a hearing.
• A judge declining to read all documents that are in the hearing bundle.
• A judge reserving (or refusing to reserve) a case to themselves.
• A judge recusing (or refusing to recuse) themselves from a hearing.
• A judge refusing to correspond with a party about a case, or drawing correspondence to a close.

Rickrolled. FFS!!

What are you on about? I was talking about working class people I know in America, men if it matters, who voted for Trump. I didn't even mention Peggie. Peggie obviously can't vote for Trump, not being an American citizen.

I watched Upton give evidence and I do not think he's a nice man. Controlling, narcissistic, maybe, nice, no. Yet it was clear he was absolutely convinced that he is right and morally superior. That's what I was discussing. People like that.

More broadly, people on the left who by their actions cause harm but who self-identify as moral and then claim anyone who votes Trump is evil.

The point is the evidence of my own experience is the opposite. Obviously there are nice and horrible people on all political sides, but it's only the left that seem to position literally everyone who's against them politically as evil and almost subhuman and not worthy of respect. And it's very obviously just not true, and doing that is probably a large part of why Trump won because - does it really need saying - attempting to shame people, especially if you're a dick yourself, doesn't go down very well. Deeds not words etc.

Precisely but we live in a society where posh men feel entitled to get their way all the time and other posh men bend over backwards to support them, including the judge in Sandie's case. Dr Upton's smug face in the photo below epitomizes middle-class male entitlement for me:
https://news.sky.com/story/transgender-doctor-at-centre-of-hospital-changing-room-row-tells-tribunal-presence-was-not-an-invasion-of-privacy-13307003

On the plus side, Ben Cooper has joined the Appeal Team!

A video from the black belt barrister about all the shenanigans:

I'll try again.
I live in the west of Scotland. We have a neighbour, a Pakistani, who introduces himself to everyone as "Peter the P*".

Some people from a minority group accepting a pejorative term of abuse to fit in with society is a recognised phenomenon. It doesn’t make it acceptable.

Would they use abusive words for Jews? Black people?

No. So why is it acceptable for Muslims / Pakistanis?