Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Flip

1 2 ··· 28 29 30 ··· 39 40

Original poster

Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton, following Employment Tribunal judgment - thread #60

1000 replies

nauticant · 16/12/2025 22:37

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

OP posts:

Thread gallery

nicepotoftea · 29/12/2025 14:25

CarefulN0w · 29/12/2025 13:47

Kemp's conclusion just doesn't make sense. He is of the generation that would have been a teenager in the seventies and eighties, so God only knows where he gets the concept of a 'female hair style'. His idea that a woman's perception of a man should change depending on his clothes and hair style is nuts.
I’m just a few years younger than Kemp, and although long hair, make-up and androgynous dressing was fashionable, there were still plenty of men who openly called men who wore earrings “poofs” so I don’t think it was universally accepted. I can imagine in the professional legal circles Kemp entered as a young man, long hair was not seen.

For reference, I have attached a picture of Tony Blair and his contemporaries at St John's College Oxford in 1975

Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton, following Employment Tribunal judgment - thread #60

ArabellaSaurus · 29/12/2025 14:31

Aberdeen pre oil would have been very different! CofS granite.

nicepotoftea · 29/12/2025 14:32

Here is George Michael

nicepotoftea · 29/12/2025 14:34

Here is Princess Diana, and from the hairstyle (just like George Michael's) and clothes, one can only assume that everyone thinks she is a man.

Stopbringingmicehome · 29/12/2025 14:35

ChimpanzeeThatMonkeyNews · 29/12/2025 10:28

JM really puzzles me.
I understand that he has a ‘trans kid’, hence he must defend this bullshit to his dying breath.

But, is there possibly any point at which he’d say ‘ok…it’s over. We lost’?

Sally Hines is another one of those adults who inexplicably just won’t let it lie.
Does she have a ‘trans kid’, or is TRA bullshit just her blood group now??

If it were me, i think (after the SC judgment), i might hold my hands up and say ‘ok, it’s over’.
I dunno.🤷🏻‍♀️

Who is JM?

nicepotoftea · 29/12/2025 14:38

With their similar hair styles how can we possibly know which one is Gregory?

prh47bridge · 29/12/2025 14:45

Stopbringingmicehome · 29/12/2025 14:35

Who is JM?

Show quote history

Jolyon Maugham of the (misnamed) Good Law Project.

Mochudubh · 29/12/2025 15:20

I think it's very likely that Big Sond is simply what used to be called a Male Chauvinist Pig.

He probably thinks women shouldn't be allowed in the bar at the Golf Club (except to serve or clean of course).

WearyAuldWumman · 29/12/2025 15:20

ArabellaSaurus · 29/12/2025 14:31

Aberdeen pre oil would have been very different! CofS granite.

I have just checked DH'S photo of the AU weightlifting squad from 1969. No long hair, but plenty of sideburns and one with hair over the ears. Photo of the longest hair attached. He had a moustache as well, so obviously n-b. I've blurred the image.

selffellatingouroborosofhate · 29/12/2025 15:38

MyAmpleSheep · 29/12/2025 09:32

I was thinking about that just now. Based on a study of exactly zero evidence and no reading of authorities whatsoever, I decided that it was impossible.

The Scottish Government can't argue that its own human rights had been breached because as a public body it doesn't have any, and certainly canot itself claim to be a person with a GRC now denied the right to take up a place on the bord of another public body reserved for women. It can't continue to act on behalf of such an individual GRC-holder, because in FWS there isn't one. It also doesn't have a direct interest in equality law since that is not a devolved matter. And - the Scottish government is a statutory creation of the United Kindom as a state. So, ultimately, the UK could simply abolish the Scottish Government to extinguish any action between the two.

And, now I've started to look for authorities, I find this, in Assandize v. Georgia: at 149:

The Court thus emphasises that the higher authorities of the Georgian State are strictly liable under the Convention for the conduct of their subordinates (see Ireland v. the United Kingdom , cited above, p. 64, § 159). It is only the responsibility of the Georgian State itself – not that of a domestic authority or organ – that is in issue before the Court. It is not the Court's role to deal with a multiplicity of national authorities or courts or to examine disputes between institutions or over internal politics.

Edited

Show quote history

the UK could simply abolish the Scottish Government

We can only hope.

SparklingCrow · 29/12/2025 15:53

SlackJawedDisbeliefXY · 28/12/2025 21:06

Following up on the suggestion of bias from Judge Kemp.

During the tribunal Dr Upton was asked if he was a biological woman, he responded something along the lines - I am not a robot so I must be biological, I know that I am a woman not a man, therefore I am a biological woman.

In his judgment Kemp gave weight to how committed Upton was to his identity and described repeated mis-gendering during cross-examination as offensive. He further stated that he believed Dr Upton's account of what had happed more than SP's because he was a more credible witness.

To my mind the opposite is true, Dr Upton was clearly stating 'facts' that were demonstrably untrue - he was telling lies in his evidence. Repeatedly.

Dr Upton's evidence repeatedly demonstrated that his grip on reality was somewhat tenuous.

Faced with Dr Upton's lies, Judge Kemp uses Olympic level metal gymnastics to turn them into a laudable demonstration of true belief in gender identity.

To me, Judge Kemp has introduced a new concept to law - it is Ok to lie to a tribunal as long as you really, really believe what you are saying is true.

Edited

To me, Judge Kemp has introduced a new concept to law - it is Ok to lie to a tribunal as long as you really, really believe what you are saying is true.

I think it’s even worse than this, @SlackJawedDisbeliefXY (excellent post, btw). I think EJ Kemp has introduced the concept that it is OK to lie to a tribunal as long as you’re really, really convincing.

SwirlyGates · 29/12/2025 16:39

nauticant · 29/12/2025 12:26

These days, the target sport to spoil is women's golf:

https://x.com/ripx4nutmeg/status/1959870193901179332

Show quote history

I thought trans women had been banned already from women's golf - there was that guy who claimed it was a vendetta against him as he was "the only person affected by the ban" (conveniently ignoring the non-people, i.e. women, who were affected and benefitted). But there are different leagues I suppose, and that is Canada after all.

MyThreeWords · 29/12/2025 17:17

SparklingCrow · 29/12/2025 15:53

To me, Judge Kemp has introduced a new concept to law - it is Ok to lie to a tribunal as long as you really, really believe what you are saying is true.

Show quote history

You don't even have to be convincing. Just make sure that you tell lies that the judge is happy to hear.

CraftyRedBird · 29/12/2025 17:48

prh47bridge · 29/12/2025 14:17

My point is that the tribunal did find the relevant law (albeit they got it wrong), applied the facts (again got that wrong) then came to a judgement. If AI was used, it was to produce a written judgement that incorporated their interpretation of the law and facts. The tribunal did not use AI to make the judgement, but they may have used AI to produce the written judgement.

Show quote history

I understood your point, but I disagree with the attempt to draw a clean line between “making” the judgment and “producing” the written judgment.

A judgment is a single process: identifying the relevant law, determining the facts, and applying one to the other.

If AI falsely generated legal authorities or reasoning that were incorporated into the tribunal’s reasons, then AI was involved in the judgment-making process itself, not merely its transcription or presentation.

Or in other words, if some of the AI generated results had been correct or different, the judgement may be different.

prh47bridge · 29/12/2025 18:29

CraftyRedBird · 29/12/2025 17:48

I understood your point, but I disagree with the attempt to draw a clean line between “making” the judgment and “producing” the written judgment.

A judgment is a single process: identifying the relevant law, determining the facts, and applying one to the other.

Or in other words, if some of the AI generated results had been correct or different, the judgement may be different.

Edited

Show quote history

Given the way employment tribunals work there is a very clear line between making the judgement (i.e. deciding the outcome of the case) and producing the written judgement. The three members of the tribunal decide the outcome of the case together. After they have made their decision, the judge produces the written judgement, setting out the evidence, the tribunal's findings of fact and any decisions they have made on questions of law, and citing authorities in support of their decision.

ILoveLaLaLand · 29/12/2025 18:57

ArabellaSaurus · 28/12/2025 19:33

It's also not logical to say that just because some people made claims that the SC is corrupt, therefore Kemp is not corrupt.

Maybe he's not. Maybe he is just ragingly incompetent and deeply sexist. But I think it would be naive to not consider other reasons for his travesty of a judgment.

Show quote history

My money is on Kemp being leaned on politically.

OpheliaWitchoftheWoods · 29/12/2025 19:09

This reply has been withdrawn

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ at the poster's request.

OpheliaWitchoftheWoods · 29/12/2025 19:13

This reply has been withdrawn

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ at the poster's request.

SionnachRuadh · 29/12/2025 20:59

This reply has been deleted

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ at the poster's request.

I think, given what public life in Scotland is like, it might have been unthinkable for Kemp to arrive at the conclusions that we all think are obvious. We had the FWS judgment right in the middle of the tribunal, and ScotGov seem absolutely determined to ignore the judgment. I don't think it's necessary for a public official in Scotland to be leaned on.

You're right though, it's the madness of producing this kind of judgment, under what he must have known would be close scrutiny, that I can't wrap my head around. Basic sexism and/or classism (or maybe just doctorism) could have fed into how credible he found the various witnesses, but I would still expect an experienced judge with, as far as I can tell, a good reputation to produce something that looks credible.

I've never heard of a judge self-sabotaging, and it would be unethical for one to do so, but this Bart Simpson book report of a judgment really makes me wonder. It should be career ending, but in Scotland, who knows...

Cailleach1 · 29/12/2025 20:59

Mochudubh · 29/12/2025 15:20

I think it's very likely that Big Sond is simply what used to be called a Male Chauvinist Pig.

He probably thinks women shouldn't be allowed in the bar at the Golf Club (except to serve or clean of course).

Edited

And then state that the golf course is not just male. Because women can clean, cook, and serve an exclusively male membership, it becomes ‘mixed sex’ Aren’t we supposed to pretend that is rational now, a la the ‘logic’ of Alexander Kemp?

Quite the porker, as you say.

SwirlyGates · 29/12/2025 21:38

@OpheliaWitchoftheWoods Nothing has meaning, nothing holds accountability, nothing is enforceable, no agreed shared lines or codes... yippee kaiyay, here's the wild west.

Well it seems the law has diminishing relevance in this country. I just read a thread about a cat who was shot - potential 5 year imprisonment, but the police weren't interested. And so many shoplifters get given the green light by police forces who won't attend. Bikes get stolen, the victim finds it on gumtree and the police won't do anything, leaving the victim to get it back themselves.

Oh, but if you say something on twitter or facebook the police will come after you! Even if they can't actually find anything wrong with what you said. But as we know, only some people get arrested - others issue death or rape threats with no consequence.

NebulousSupportPostcard · 29/12/2025 21:53

Mochudubh · 29/12/2025 15:20

I think it's very likely that Big Sond is simply what used to be called a Male Chauvinist Pig.

He probably thinks women shouldn't be allowed in the bar at the Golf Club (except to serve or clean of course).

Edited

I think he has a daughter who is a lawyer, and with whom he was jointly a director of a company earlier in her career.

The whole thing is baffling to me. I'm inclined to think it's some combination of being leaned on politically, having an innate preference for people of his own social class and, most likely of all: being completely out of his depth and making a grave error of judgement in his over-reliance on AI.

CarefulN0w · 29/12/2025 22:33

The lawyer daughter is an interesting thought. Did she help Dad put together the complicated judgement, I wonder?

ILoveLaLaLand · 29/12/2025 22:44

NebulousSupportPostcard · 29/12/2025 21:53

I think he has a daughter who is a lawyer, and with whom he was jointly a director of a company earlier in her career.

Show quote history

I would say that judges are typically more lenient with people from their own social class than with working-class people. This judgement just highlights it more because Upton is a doctor while Sandie Peggie is a working-class nurse.

prh47bridge · 29/12/2025 23:57

CarefulN0w · 29/12/2025 22:33

The lawyer daughter is an interesting thought. Did she help Dad put together the complicated judgement, I wonder?

I hope not. Assuming she exists and is a lawyer, that would be highly improper.

Flip

1 2 ··· 28 29 30 ··· 39 40

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.

Swipe left for the next trending thread