Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton, following Employment Tribunal judgment - thread #61

[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.

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 #60 can be found in this thread: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5379717-sandie-peggie-list-of-threads-covering-employment-tribunal-and-afterwards

Thread 60: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5461133-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-following-employment-tribunal-judgment-thread-60 16 December 2025 to 8 January 2026

Asked about the case, Badenoch said she would “trust For Women Scotland over the Scottish government any day”.

Many of us would, I'm sure.

I'd trust Boris Johnson over the ScotGov!

And that is really saying something.

Ruling expected today for the Darlington Nurses Case: https://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/teesside-news/ruling-expected-nurses-transgender-changing-33242208.amp

Darlington nurses have won!!!

This should help Sandie's appeal.

It won't help directly as tribunal decisions don't set precedents, but from what I've read it seems to engage with FWS correctly and, instead of deciding that the Workplace Regulations are a criminal matter it should ignore, it engages with those too. I haven't read the judgement itself yet, only press summaries, but it appears to get right the things this tribunal got wrong. It may help indirectly, of course. The fact that two tribunals have come to opposing decisions about the same law will have to be addressed so that employers and employees know where they stand.

This is why I posted this upthread:

There have been reports that the appeal has already been filed but I don't believe it. In such a fast-changing situation best practice would be to file close to the deadline to make sure that the Grounds of Appeal are up to date with all the developments.

I also wonder whether Sandie Peggie's legal team, having read the Darlington nurses' judgment, and how a non-captured tribunal deals with the facts in a similar case, will be thinking hard about whether to push for a re-hearing rather than the case continuing at the EAT level.

They have to go to the EAT to get a re-hearing.

I've skimmed the judgment and it clearly says (my emphasis) at para 374:

"There is nothing in the Act that we could see (or that we were taken to) that confers on a transgender employee the right to use the changing facilities that accords with their declared or affirmed gender. The Equality Act 2010 protects those with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment from discrimination, harassment and victimisation, in the same way that it providesb such protection to those of other protected characteristics. However, that does not translate into a positive ‘right’ on the part of a trans woman to use the female changing room (or for that matter of a trans man to use the male changing room)."

Shame it's not a binding EAT ruling.

It also says Rose didn't harass the nurses which I disagree with, but the result is outstanding for women's rights.

Anybody else a bit Squeaky With Excitement over the Darlington Nurses outcome?

You should see the squeaking from the gerbils in The Bluestocking Women's Pub.

Thanks @MarieDeGournayI like this wording. I may borrow it, should the need arise.

The Equality Act 2010 protects those with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment from discrimination, harassment and victimisation, in the same way that it provides such protection to those of other protected characteristics. However, that does not translate into a positive ‘right’ on the part of a trans woman to use the female changing room (or for that matter of a trans man to use the male changing room).

Great news - sanity slowly but surely returning.

Cutting it fine though, the deadline is Monday!

But probably they would have it written but hold off submission so they can take into account any last minute developments? That’s what I did with my detailed written submission to the GRA consultation back in 2018 anyway 😂

Excellent work!

Immediately after I posted I remembered JR's post-11pm email to tribunal to apply for Bananarama defence pleading change. So yeah, a weekend is probably a long time in law and politics!

In the Times today:
https://www.thetimes.com/article/a3fc6fd2-c8b5-46ea-aa17-d3fa0332b58d?shareToken=2a810976a07757e92cee7ba8998bca4e

That is such an interesting article: “men go to the toilets for two things, women for three”. Maybe we should make more of the period side of things, as it embarrasses men.

My lovely Dad knew about women flooding even before my Mum went through menopause because he told me once that he sometimes, when he was a child, saw women coming out of church after a long mass (Sundays or feast days) with blood stains on their skirts. He was born in 1931, I don't actually know what women would have used then during menstruation in rural Bavaria.

An important aspect of the debate people don’t want to discuss, so well done The Times, highlighting the embarrassment surrounding menstrual flooding

The missing workplace reality behind Sandie Peggie’s NHS Fife tribunal case

www.thetimes.com/article/a3fc6fd2-c8b5-46ea-aa17-d3fa0332b58d?shareToken=77e49391fb74223cec8ce72bdb8a45fc

Flooding was a large part of Kelly’s case v Leonardo. I felt very sorry for for having to talk about it in detail to a court- her employers should have listened when she told them.

Good article and so true. It affects so many women.

Good article but I did have a bit of an eyeroll at this

During Menopause Cafe discussions, Weiss has heard train drivers, bus drivers, school teachers and barristers discuss how hard it is to cope with heavy bleeding while they are at work. The cafes, which take place online and in venues, welcome people of all genders and provide a space where anyone can chat about the topic, along with other menopause symptoms.

I'm generously going to assume they mean all women and hope that blokes with a menstruation fetish won't be indulged.

Almost certainly folded rags. Cotton wool sanitary pads were available in 1930s UK [edit: first sanitary towel patent 1885] but not commonly used. I expect Bavaria would have been similar.