Sandie Peggie vs NHS Fife Health Board and Dr Beth Upton, following Employment Tribunal judgment - thread #62

[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 and it was reported on 3 August 2026 that leave to appeal had been granted with an expectation that the appeal proceedings could take place in court early next year (2027).

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

Thread 61: mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5472628-sandie-peggie-vs-nhs-fife-health-board-and-dr-beth-upton-following-employment-tribunal-judgment-thread-61 8 January 2026 to 3 August 2026

As Michael Foran said
legally binding EAT incoming

I just pissed myself off. The analogue i should have referred to is Sygourney Weaver, Aliens.

Xena?

Here to say hi! Thanks @nauticant .

Keep going Sandie! We're behind you!

From the previous thread:

Needspaceforlego · Yesterday 17:00
prh47bridge · Yesterday 16:58
The judge is not going to be there to defend himself. I may be wrong, but I would expect the EAT to be focussed on the legal errors in the judgement rather than how those errors got there.
I'd think so too.
They'll end up being a different enquiry into the fuckups in the judgment

There's been an enquiry. They found it was all absolutely fine, definitely not AI, and nobody has any problem with mysterious 'judicial colleagues' adding made-up quotes from non-existent cases. Nothing to see here; move along please.

Reporting for duty but if BU isn't going to be around I might need a new name 😥

Excellent news about leave to appeal. I just wish the wheels of justice turned a bit faster.

Just checking in from the Archers thread . Delighted Sandie has had the appeal approved - fingers crossed for 2027 and a (sane) binding judgement. Dr Upton no loss to these shores.

Be careful what you wish for @nauticant

As @MyAmpleSheep said, there is no further evidence given in an appeal.

However, he may have to depending on what the EAT says.

Sometimes, the EAT will make a decision and substitute it's own decision in place of that of the ET.

In other cases it will remit the case back to the ET (after having made it's judgment). So it will send the whole case or specific issues back to the same or a different ET to re-examine the facts under the correct legal rules. In this case Upton may well be required to give evidence again at a new ET hearing.

This is what happened in the Maya Forstater case.

The ET originally held that GC beliefs were not worthy of respect. She then went to the EAT in June 2021 and they said that they were worthy of respect. Her case then went back to the ET in July 2022 where they then found that she was a victim of direct discrimination.

Ah. Thanks @Kirschcherries and @MyAmpleSheep and @Another2Cats for clearing that up for me. Though I will be sorry ( such sad times) not to hear further weeping testimony from the good doctor.

It will take even longer if the EAT decides to send the case back to the ET. The courts are badly underfunded.

Do I remeber correctly that Sandie was also planning to bring a new case based on things revealed at the first one - including against KS, as she wasn't able to add her as a late respondent in the first one? If so, there may be more weeping witnesses still to come.

Oh there are many more chapters to come in this case...

We have Sandie v the RCN up next month for a start,

Damn you Feminist I will now be stuck with this all day. Nooooo

And good luck Sandie, with three cheers for a precedent setting court.

Yes, I remember TRAs at the time clutching to the belief that her ET case would still be lost and the protection for GC beliefs would be shown up as in name only. They were to be disappointed.

I'm very pleased she is going to appeal.
Wasn't sure whether to invent new mooseish username incorporating Sad Times, but I decided being nebulous is ok for now.
Thanks for the continued work @nauticant

In this case Upton may well be required to give evidence again at a new ET hearing.

As the defendant (one of them) in a civil case not in the UK he can’t be compelled to appear and I think the move to Australia suggests he won’t even reply to the tribunal’s correspondence, if that should be the case.

Indeed. However, if the case is sent back to ET and he refuses to appear, that will undermine both his and NHS Fife's case. They will still have his witness statements, but they will be given much less weight if he is not available for cross examination.

I'm sure he doesn't care what happens to this case or NHS Fife any more. He has no ongoing relationship with what is merely a very small regional health authority he used to work for in a tiny country nearly 10,000 miles away, that wasn't very nice to him.

Following. Hoping one day NHS medical professionals will once again feel that they can confidently assert knowledge of the sex of another human being.

Thank you, @nauticant 💐 and all the knowledgeable contributors.
I am in awe of Sandie (and her invaluable backer).

For the sake of argument, if the case got sent back to ET and they ruled against him, partly because his evidence was discounted, what happens then? Is it a case of "well, Sandie, he owes you compensation, but good luck getting it because he lives in Australia now" or are there enforcement mechanisms?

Does Upton 'owe' Sandie anything? He is not her employer.

I'd argue that Fife was exceptionally nice to him. Although I wouldn't expect him to agree.