Active discussions

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

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton, following Employment Tribunal judgment - thread #59

1000 replies

nauticant · 12/12/2025 19:37

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.

Following handing down of the judgment on 8 December 2025, on 11 December 2025, it was announced by Sandie Peggie and her legal team that they would be pursuing an appeal.

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
Thread 58: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5458443-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-following-employment-tribunal-judgment-thread-58 11 December 2025 to 12 December 2025

OP posts:
Thread gallery
62
NotanotherWeek · 14/12/2025 21:18

MyrtleLion · 14/12/2025 21:11

I don't see how Kemp can continueas an employment judge. Surely every claimant's barrister will ask him to recuse himself on the grounds that any judgment of his will be written by AI...

But then if he returned to private practice, would you want him taking on your case? Unless, of course, he and the judge used the same AI, then you’d be made!

MetaCertificateAnnotationsJudgmentFINAL · 14/12/2025 21:18

A more youthful, hopeful @nauticant

Life offered a lesson in return for your kindness.

Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton, following Employment Tribunal judgment - thread #59
Original poster
nauticant · 14/12/2025 21:19

With the SP appeal, which I had originally thought would be conditional on leave to appeal being granted but now think is a done deal because if granting it is resisted, then, if needs must, it'll be the Supreme Court which grants it, I'm wondering if it'll be BC/NC arguing against an EAT wanting to start afresh with a new ET hearing, because what they'll have is such an embarrassment of riches, they'll be able to spend weeks tearing Kemp's work to shreds.

OP posts:
MetaCertificateAnnotationsJudgmentFINAL · 14/12/2025 21:19

NotanotherWeek · 14/12/2025 21:18

But then if he returned to private practice, would you want him taking on your case? Unless, of course, he and the judge used the same AI, then you’d be made!

Show quote history

He’ll be ready to retire.

Everyone will be ready for him to retire.

ArabellaSaurus · 14/12/2025 21:20

I've thought, and come to a possible cause for Kemp's issue.

  1. He is not very intelligent.
  2. He got confused, and angry at his failure to grasp the genderwhang.
  3. Women who understood the issues better than him angered him further.
  4. He realised as the tribunal progressed how out of his depth he was.
  5. He wrote copious, excessive amounts to try to cover up for his lack of understanding.
  6. He failed.
  7. Because he couldn't understand what the women were saying, and because he has a fundamentally sexist worldview, women who refuse to accept their status as second class citizens infuriate him.
  8. He therefore decided that Peggie and any women supporting her are Bad People.
  9. He was bedazzled by Upton's utter undergrad bulshit.
  10. He decided the nice doctor and his nice family are Good People.
  11. He wrote the judgment starting from that endpoint.
  12. He desperately tried to create a workable definition of the SC judgment that was inclusive of this sexist/batshit worldview, without actually having grasped any of the reasoning of the SC, because see point 1.

Other alternative explanations are far less savoury, and include reasons he may feel extra disposed to men calling themselves women. Or governmental interference.

For all of our sakes, the first scenario is the best possible one. Also meets Hanlon's razor.

Original poster
nauticant · 14/12/2025 21:21

MetaCertificateAnnotationsJudgmentFINAL · 14/12/2025 21:18

A more youthful, hopeful @nauticant

Life offered a lesson in return for your kindness.

That post is going to be a warning from history for any other volunteers.

OP posts:
ArabellaSaurus · 14/12/2025 21:22

I hope you're not flagging, nauticant. Do you need ringside assisance? A backrub? Sedatives?

Original poster
nauticant · 14/12/2025 21:24

Just convince me we're starting round 12 and in my punch-drunk state I'll say I'm fine and up for more.

OP posts:
AuntieMsDamsonCrumble · 14/12/2025 21:28

SqueakyDinosaur · 14/12/2025 21:14

I wonder if in light of the absolute clusterfuck of court management meaning there had to be three separate tranches of court sitting days, word has gone out to other EA judges that they need to manage time in their courts better and more proactively? And if not, why not? Obviously, sometimes things will overrun, but e.g. DU and ?? Maggie Curren (the one who wanged on for half a day about DSDs when they're utterly fucking irrelevant) should surely have been directed to just answer the bloody question?

A lot of the delays could have been avoided if SK had not allowed JR's incessant interruptions.

KTheGrey · 14/12/2025 21:28

prh47bridge · 14/12/2025 20:24

If SP's team attack the whole thing, which I expect they will, the EAT will have to deal with that. They can't take the points of law and ignore the rest. They will have to look at the question of bias if it is raised. They will have to look at any findings of fact for which there are no supporting evidence.

This judgement is so bad that I currently expect it to lead to a rehearing with a different tribunal. I will be pleased if the EAT feels able to find in SP's favour on all counts without sending it back to tribunal, but I would be surprised if they feel able to do that.

Show quote history

If the whole thing has to be reheard from scratch, don’t they (EAT I assume) have to give reasons? And who pays? We know NHSFife have squandered £400k on their side; we can assume that SP’s side won’t have spent less. How are both complainant and respondent covered for costs due to cock ups by the tribunal?

MetaCertificateAnnotationsJudgmentFINAL · 14/12/2025 21:31

ArabellaSaurus · 14/12/2025 21:20

I've thought, and come to a possible cause for Kemp's issue.

  1. He is not very intelligent.
  2. He got confused, and angry at his failure to grasp the genderwhang.
  3. Women who understood the issues better than him angered him further.
  4. He realised as the tribunal progressed how out of his depth he was.
  5. He wrote copious, excessive amounts to try to cover up for his lack of understanding.
  6. He failed.
  7. Because he couldn't understand what the women were saying, and because he has a fundamentally sexist worldview, women who refuse to accept their status as second class citizens infuriate him.
  8. He therefore decided that Peggie and any women supporting her are Bad People.
  9. He was bedazzled by Upton's utter undergrad bulshit.
  10. He decided the nice doctor and his nice family are Good People.
  11. He wrote the judgment starting from that endpoint.
  12. He desperately tried to create a workable definition of the SC judgment that was inclusive of this sexist/batshit worldview, without actually having grasped any of the reasoning of the SC, because see point 1.

Other alternative explanations are far less savoury, and include reasons he may feel extra disposed to men calling themselves women. Or governmental interference.

For all of our sakes, the first scenario is the best possible one. Also meets Hanlon's razor.

I’m going to bang this drum 🥁 loud and hard for a while now.

  • Two women sat alongside Kemp.
  • They heard all the evidence.
  • They saw what he saw.
  • They agreed in principle.
  • They steered his thinking.

Sure he fired the bullet. But they all loaded the gun.

Ms L Brown (likely appointed 2020) (10 cases to her name) and Ms C Russell (appointed more recently)(fewer) have also their names on this judgment and endorsed it.

They heard about a menopausal woman experiencing flooding in front of a young man in a bra. It should have meant something to them, women in their middle age. They heard a 28 year old newly wed man in a bra was making notes on a 50 year old nurse of 30 years experience, fixated because she wouldn’t strip for him. They saw a large gangly 6 foot man with a widow’s peak call himself a biological woman.

And they said He was credible.

It is in their names and on their heads be it.

MetaCertificateAnnotationsJudgmentFINAL · 14/12/2025 21:31

KTheGrey · 14/12/2025 21:28

If the whole thing has to be reheard from scratch, don’t they (EAT I assume) have to give reasons? And who pays? We know NHSFife have squandered £400k on their side; we can assume that SP’s side won’t have spent less. How are both complainant and respondent covered for costs due to cock ups by the tribunal?

Show quote history

Yes this all the way.

ArabellaSaurus · 14/12/2025 21:34

Eh, don't worry, it'll be the Scottish taxpayers shelling out for this pish, all over again.

We paid to take FWS to the SC! We paid for both flipping sides!

prh47bridge · 14/12/2025 21:37

KTheGrey · 14/12/2025 21:28

If the whole thing has to be reheard from scratch, don’t they (EAT I assume) have to give reasons? And who pays? We know NHSFife have squandered £400k on their side; we can assume that SP’s side won’t have spent less. How are both complainant and respondent covered for costs due to cock ups by the tribunal?

Show quote history

Yes, the EAT will give reasons. Fife and SP will continue to pay their own costs.

Original poster
nauticant · 14/12/2025 21:40

Has an ET ever turned so dysfunctional before?

Are we actually in new territory where we're well beyond established ways of working?

OP posts:
Original poster
nauticant · 14/12/2025 21:41

Let alone the fact that there's going to be relentless and considerable coverage of the mess and how the Establishment will not want to engage with it.

OP posts:
FallenSloppyDead2 · 14/12/2025 21:42

ArabellaSaurus · 14/12/2025 21:20

I've thought, and come to a possible cause for Kemp's issue.

  1. He is not very intelligent.
  2. He got confused, and angry at his failure to grasp the genderwhang.
  3. Women who understood the issues better than him angered him further.
  4. He realised as the tribunal progressed how out of his depth he was.
  5. He wrote copious, excessive amounts to try to cover up for his lack of understanding.
  6. He failed.
  7. Because he couldn't understand what the women were saying, and because he has a fundamentally sexist worldview, women who refuse to accept their status as second class citizens infuriate him.
  8. He therefore decided that Peggie and any women supporting her are Bad People.
  9. He was bedazzled by Upton's utter undergrad bulshit.
  10. He decided the nice doctor and his nice family are Good People.
  11. He wrote the judgment starting from that endpoint.
  12. He desperately tried to create a workable definition of the SC judgment that was inclusive of this sexist/batshit worldview, without actually having grasped any of the reasoning of the SC, because see point 1.

Other alternative explanations are far less savoury, and include reasons he may feel extra disposed to men calling themselves women. Or governmental interference.

For all of our sakes, the first scenario is the best possible one. Also meets Hanlon's razor.

I wonder also if Lord Sumption's incorrect interpretation of FWS in the early days got inside his head and lodged there. The idea that you can exclude TW from women's single-sex facilities but you are not obliged to do so.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/lord-sumption-trans-biolgical-woman-supreme-court-b2735828.html

Original poster
nauticant · 14/12/2025 21:44

I listened to Sumption's take live. As I heard it I thought that I'd never need to listen seriously to anything he ever said in the future. Interesting, sure, but no longer credible.

OP posts:
NebulousSupportPostcard · 14/12/2025 21:45

Has the listing and .pdf name of the judgment been changed from "and another" to Dr Upton? That's what it looks like to me but I am concerned that I am imagining things at this ridiculous stage of time!

NotanotherWeek · 14/12/2025 21:45

MetaCertificateAnnotationsJudgmentFINAL · 14/12/2025 21:31

I’m going to bang this drum 🥁 loud and hard for a while now.

  • Two women sat alongside Kemp.
  • They heard all the evidence.
  • They saw what he saw.
  • They agreed in principle.
  • They steered his thinking.

Sure he fired the bullet. But they all loaded the gun.

Ms L Brown (likely appointed 2020) (10 cases to her name) and Ms C Russell (appointed more recently)(fewer) have also their names on this judgment and endorsed it.

They heard about a menopausal woman experiencing flooding in front of a young man in a bra. It should have meant something to them, women in their middle age. They heard a 28 year old newly wed man in a bra was making notes on a 50 year old nurse of 30 years experience, fixated because she wouldn’t strip for him. They saw a large gangly 6 foot man with a widow’s peak call himself a biological woman.

And they said He was credible.

It is in their names and on their heads be it.

Show quote history

Totally right, but they aren’t responsible for the fifth form essay masquerading as a legal judgment. They will have left the technical stuff to Sandy, and he either cocked it up or goblins got in during the night when he was asleep and took his carefully considered prose and cut it up and pasted it in a random order while singing their merry goblin song.

MetaCertificateAnnotationsJudgmentFINAL · 14/12/2025 21:46

Any way back machine gurus can point me in the direction of how I would find similar appointments?

judiciary.scot/home/media-information/media-hub-news/2025/08/26/tribunal-legal-members-appointed

FallenSloppyDead2 · 14/12/2025 21:48

NotanotherWeek · 14/12/2025 21:45

Totally right, but they aren’t responsible for the fifth form essay masquerading as a legal judgment. They will have left the technical stuff to Sandy, and he either cocked it up or goblins got in during the night when he was asleep and took his carefully considered prose and cut it up and pasted it in a random order while singing their merry goblin song.

Show quote history

Seriously, wasn't that how Bowie used to arrange his lyrics?

TheCorrsDidDreamsBetter · 14/12/2025 21:48

MetaCertificateAnnotationsJudgmentFINAL · 14/12/2025 21:31

I’m going to bang this drum 🥁 loud and hard for a while now.

  • Two women sat alongside Kemp.
  • They heard all the evidence.
  • They saw what he saw.
  • They agreed in principle.
  • They steered his thinking.

Sure he fired the bullet. But they all loaded the gun.

Ms L Brown (likely appointed 2020) (10 cases to her name) and Ms C Russell (appointed more recently)(fewer) have also their names on this judgment and endorsed it.

They heard about a menopausal woman experiencing flooding in front of a young man in a bra. It should have meant something to them, women in their middle age. They heard a 28 year old newly wed man in a bra was making notes on a 50 year old nurse of 30 years experience, fixated because she wouldn’t strip for him. They saw a large gangly 6 foot man with a widow’s peak call himself a biological woman.

And they said He was credible.

It is in their names and on their heads be it.

Show quote history

He should have been deemed not credible as soon as he said sex is a nebulous dogwhistle.

How can any judge and panel who will have undoubtedly had experience dealing with cases of sexism hear that and go, aye, makes sense, guess if sex is nebulous we don't need to consider sexism.

MetaCertificateAnnotationsJudgmentFINAL · 14/12/2025 21:49

NotanotherWeek · 14/12/2025 21:45

Totally right, but they aren’t responsible for the fifth form essay masquerading as a legal judgment. They will have left the technical stuff to Sandy, and he either cocked it up or goblins got in during the night when he was asleep and took his carefully considered prose and cut it up and pasted it in a random order while singing their merry goblin song.

Show quote history

They didn’t even say eh that weird Swedish study - jolly strange you compared trans identified men with men. You were meant to compare them with women.

Oh and come on we all know Upton is a man. He’s not been on the estrogen at all.

ArabellaSaurus · 14/12/2025 21:50

MetaCertificateAnnotationsJudgmentFINAL · 14/12/2025 21:46

Any way back machine gurus can point me in the direction of how I would find similar appointments?

judiciary.scot/home/media-information/media-hub-news/2025/08/26/tribunal-legal-members-appointed

<a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20241223061737/judiciary.scot/home/media-information/media-hub-news" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://web.archive.org/web/20250000000000/judiciary.scot/home/media-information/media-hub-news/

See if that works. If not, just paste the url of the page into the Wayback machine.

Edit: Seems to have preserved the headlines of news items, but not the articles themselves, unfortunately.

Please create an account

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

Join Mumsnet Log In
This thread is not accepting new messages.