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

Assuming it is true (and frankly I suspect a combination of AI and the EJ in the Kelly case - possibly AI by the Kelly case judge given Kemp’s handwritten notes) then it is still 100% up to Kemp to check the references. If I were an eminent judge (IANAL) and were asked for an opinion/advice on this issue I might blether on about Smith v Jones but it is then up to Kemp to think ‘That’s interesting’ and read the judgement himself. I might have misremembered/misunderstood/over-indulged on the judicial port/be an absolute loon. Kemp can consult but he also has the responsibility of checking and anything he puts his name to is his responsibility, not the responsibility of the drunken activist loon he consulted.

You are right, of course, #nicepotoftea, and lot of lawyers’’ responses to Myerson are saying the same thing! My guess is they don’t want to say it’s misconduct because there would have to be an investigation, and they would prefer to just let him go off quietly to his golf. I just wanted to say above I don’t think it’s the kind of thing that creates a legal relationship that a client can sue on. At the very least, if this is not misconduct , they must produce clear guidance that applies to all judges, to say they they must not use AI, nor farm out chunks of their decision-making and incorporate it without checking it carefully. If they do that, it WILL be misconduct if another judge does it

He's got to be well into his 60s, if I were him I'd attempt to retire at the earliest opportunity and pretend it was my health.

A reminder.

Kemp spent hours listening to Isla Bumba and how she got shit off the internet rather than checking it properly for herself and got a lot of erroneous information and missed huge amount of relevant stuff. She was still being professional and knew what the fuck she was talking about and ended up looking like a right twat.

And after listening to that embarrassing car crash of a performance Judge Kemp thought he knew best and could just get someone else to research and get a load of bollocks that he could just lift without checking and the same embarrassing result wouldn't happen.

The arrogance of this is startling.

This isn't just that he was too lazy to do the work himself and got someone he probably shouldn't have to do it for him. It's that he did this AFTER witnessing first hand someone come a complete cropper doing the same thing. This is what's truly astonishing!

It makes you wonder just how many fuckwits getting paid a fortune actually do their own job rather than get a lacky to do it or just use AI without being arsed to check their homework.

But she was so credible!

@RedToothBrush I think many of the troubles we now face are largely a result of, again, people not doing their bloody jobs! Either because they are so busy 'bringing their whole self to work', such that that becomes the most important thing, or, like the fabled Lefty shop-stewards of old, are spending more time on political action, or because their adherance to the cult stops them doing their job properly, or, like Bumba, are fools who have not been trained to do their job. And that's without starting on the politicians! 😀

I do think that there is an us with captured judiciary in Scotland, you only have to look at the FWS judgement to know that, prior the the SC ruling

Tsk issue

There’s a rumour locally that our NHS Trust, having created lots of non-jobs in something called Corporate Support, is now stuck with these people because they can’t afford to pay them all redundancy

NHS have long found themselves stuck with hopeless middle manager as once they turn 50 (I think it is) they have to be offered early retirement instead of redundancy and it costs much too much to buy them out their outstanding years so they have to find non-roles for them instead.

I'm blatantly place marking ready for tomorrow's appeal announcement.

Interested to see what happens with this FOI and the ICO.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/foi_request_judicial_training_on#incoming-3143677

'This request concerns the training, guidance, and policies provided by the Judicial Institute for Scotland to members of the Scottish judiciary, particularly as they relate to:
• The proper interpretation and application of the Equality Act 2010,
• The statutory definition of “sex” following the UK Supreme Court judgments in For Women Scotland v Scottish Ministers (2022 and 2024), and
• Safeguarding and belief protections in court proceedings.'

From their refusal:

'Any judicial training materials, briefings, updates and legal summaries produced by or within the Judicial Institute are held by the Lord President himself in exercise of the functions he exercises under section 2(2)(d) of the Judiciary (Scotland) Act 2008 (“the 2008 Act”), or are held by the Judicial Institute on behalf of the Lord President in exercise of his functions (in particular those relating to the training and guidance of' judicial office holders).

1. As the Lord President is not a “Scottish Public Authority” for the purposes of section 3(1) of Freedom Of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (FOISA), any information which he holds falls outside the scope of FOISA and does not need to be released.'

Looks like this is the Heid Bummer:

https://judiciary.scot/home/judiciary/judicial-office-holders/senators-of-the-college-of-justice/lord-pentland

Place marking too

We could entertain the troops with our singing whilst we wait...

😂😂😂

We really cracked that Celine Dion song!

The power of love ……………xxx

@ProtectedlyInsufferable I think the crucial point is made by Levins, to whom Myerson is replying, "Any lawyer who misrepresented the authorities as they were misrepresented in this judgment would be facing serious - potentially career-ending - sanction."
Whoever or whatever Kemp consulted, the judgment is his responsibility & it cannot be the case that the judiciary are held to a lower standard of professional conduct than those who appear before them.

So given the comment re assistance from judicial colleague….. this adds more fuel to my speculation that there is a Scottish conspiracy in the judiciary.

EJ Sutherland rushes out her judgment in Kelly in super quick time. Says cubicle is a room and single sex toilet block sinks can be mixed sex (how bonkers!!).

She was called to the Judicary in 2018 (before becoming a salaried judge in 2020) the same year as Kemp. They are freshers together.

There are only 25 salaried Employment Judges in Scotland. So small pool. And two are facing big cases covering access to toilets & changing rooms. Both covered by the same legislation.

https://www.judiciary.uk/about-the-judiciary/who-are-the-judiciary/list-of-members-of-the-tribunals-judiciary/employment-tribunal-scotland-judges/

After EJ Sutherland publishes then within two weeks (if I recall correctly) without notice EJ Kemp rushes out his judgment stuff full of helpful material from a judicial colleague.

Another poster has said EJ Sutherland is a trans supporter. It is possible that being the case she’s swayed tim nice but dim Kemp.

All speculation - but I would love to know more.

@SexRealistic interesting arabella says as much

What’s become all the more clear - is that Sweeney hears a case, same laws, same cases, same facts.

He produces a well reasoned, clear & rational judgment.

People read it and feel relieved. Anyone can follow the logic. It says true things.

Because the judgments from Kemp & Sutherland are nonsensical. They tie themselves in knots and make up objectively idiotic stuff (Kemp corrected 11 things….., Sutherland makes up that a toilet cubicle is a room and sinks are separable from toilets).

It’s clear Kemp and Sutherland were falling over themselves to find for the trans 🏳️‍⚧️ lobby no matter what. And they were clearly colluding with others.

Kemp isn’t guilty of his errors in his judgment because it came from his judicial colleague!!!!.

Imagine a student being hailed in for errors in an essay. Their defence is - I got help from another student who introduced the errors.

Now you have to cheating students to deal with.

The judiciary have two cheating judges to deal with. Who is the second one?

He’s meant to be responsible but there’s a hefty body of evidence pointing to algorithmic appreciation that he’s just as likely fall prey to as anyone else. Possibly exacerbated by how GenAI (esp ChatGPT) has been programmed with ‘guardrails’ to play nice and is more likely to come up corporatist inclusivity to agree with Kemp than to critique his statements. All so self reinforcing.

What on earth? This case gets weirder by the minunte? I have to say that suspecting that AI was used seemed to justify all of the errors - a foolish mistake gone wrong, overload with the huge bundle, many witnesses etc. etc. (to be clear still terrible if true). However, perversely it seems worse that Kemp has produced this pile of tripe himself and with the help of another judge?! Or was his colleague called Grok?