February 11, 2025 - 7:00am
The hearing of evidence in a major case involving a trans doctor may need to be delayed as a result of the failure of NHS Fife to comply with a judicial order requiring production of documents. Sandie Peggie, a nurse of 30 yearsâ experience, is suing her employer for unlawful harassment and discrimination caused by its policy of allowing trans doctor Beth Upton, who is male but identifies as a woman, to use the female changing room. Peggie encountered Upton twice in the changing room before confronting the doctor on a third occasion. Peggie was then suspended from her role in January last year for alleged bullying and harassment.
The Peggie v. NHS Fife hearing, which was expected to conclude by 14 February, was occupied for a day last week by a sudden application, lodged by the nurse’s legal team, for an order requiring further production of evidence. In their application, the tribunal heard that several important pieces of evidence had only begun to be shared by NHS Fife and Upton in the first week of the hearing, including some documents only produced after 9.30 on Thursday evening. The tribunal heard that these documents, along with what had previously been disclosed, created a trail of evidence suggesting to Peggieâs lawyers Naomi Cunningham, Margaret Gribbon and Charlotte Elves that there had been a substantial failure to comply with a judicial order for production of evidence.
Based on the evidence provided, Peggieâs counsel suspect that NHS Fife began and then aborted an initial investigation into allegations of misconduct before starting a second investigation months after the initial complaint was raised. Jane Russell, counsel for NHS Fife, denied this but has since agreed to produce further evidence.
The remainder of the hearing will inevitably include this evidence being put to Upton and those in management positions within NHS Fife. Regardless of whether this will substantiate the claim that an initial investigation was launched, Russell had said in open court that this categorically did not happen. If Peggieâs lawyers can establish that it did, the consequences would be serious for management at NHS Fife, suggesting that the initial investigation was either improperly conducted or that it was likely to conclude that Peggie should not have been suspended in the first place. More on that will be revealed as the week progresses.
As a result of this application for further production of evidence, the hearing has lost a day that would ordinarily be available for the cross-examination of Upton. This is now expected to take two days. An extension of cross-examination is likely to have resulted from this new evidence, along with delays caused by the repeated objections raised by Russell on Monday, including that Uptonâs cross-examination is taking too long. The failure to comply with a judicial order is very serious, and Cunningham has said in open court that she and her colleagues had been working through the weekend to address the new evidence.
It is highly likely, perhaps inevitable at this point, that this hearing will not be completed in the allotted time. That will require that a later date be set to hear the remaining evidence, cross-examination, and oral submissions from both parties. Such a delay is unlikely to be welcomed by either side but should hopefully serve as a reminder to NHS Fife that judicial orders must be fully complied with, even if the material to be disclosed is embarrassing or potentially incriminating.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeI keep reading about this, but I am still none the wiser as to what the issue actually is.
OK, say there was an aborted investigation, why would that be a problem? And what could be incriminating?
The only thing I can think of, as Michael alludes to in passing, is that Peggie would have been exonerated by investigation #1, so they rigged the deck and started investigation #2.
In any case, reading excerpts from the tribunal I can’t help but feeling that these proceedings do only one thing: they bring the justice system into disrepute. If someone had pitched a TV series with this premise, they would have been sent packing in no time, unless it was the Monty Python.
Your conjecture is correct re the investigations. I think this case also brings NHS Fife into disrepute too, since they broke the law by requiring female staff to get changed along with men.
If that is the case can Peggie Sue?
She is the claimant in this case, so she is already suing.
Good job!
Nice one, Buddy (for those too young to have got it)!
That’ll be the day!
Maybe, baby.
What could be incriminating could be knowingly withholding evidence. If that is the case no lawyer can continue to act for the NHS .
Dr Upton has said under oath that he does not recognise any biological differences between male and female sexes. Although that didn’t stop him claiming that because he “is a woman and has a biology” therefore he is a “biological woman”.
IMHO, this should be a reason enough for him to be struck off the medical register. If a doctor said there was no difference between blood and bile or between a foot and a hand, then I would consider him unfit to practice.
Hear! Hear! 100% agree! People of this mentality should not ever be registered as doctors or nurses.
Ideology does not trump biology.
Well not for long, anyway.
For that idiotic statement alone, Dr Upton should be reported to the GMC. A doctor who claims the opposite of what the most basic common sense reveals is not fit to practice: full stop.
Since PM was unable to answer question who is woman, we should not be surprised that mentally ill people are allowed to practice medicine in uk.
I watched the tribunal yesterday. It took about an hour to get Dr Upton to understand the common definitions of “man” and “woman”. He had to be taken right back to how babies are made, and even then, tried to argue that it might involve more than a man and a woman. He eventually conceded that conception involves “mashing together” a sperm and an egg in some way, and that there is no third gamete involved.
He also asserted that when a baby is born, a doctor “gives his best guess” as to what sex the baby is, and denied that a child of 5 could accurately tell the sex of a baby.
He’s a doctor working in accident and emergency.
He is mentally ill or a sexual deviant or both.
Scotland is the world’s biggest promoter of men devaluing women
Perhaps the university that educated him needs looking into, there are failings all over the place if a Doctor doesnât understand basic biology! Regardless of the department he works in, I imagine porters understand biology better than he does!
He is an accident and emergency, all on his own.
At the time of the events described, he was on a psychiatric rotation as well. And he stated that were a distressed woman in mental health crisis to question his sex (thus delegitmising his “gender”) he would mark her down as aggressive in his notes. This little word indicates that the NHS can then refuse care.
He should be in a fitness to practice hearing, not giving evidence in an employment tribunal excusing his behaviour towards a nurse of thirty years standing.
If the NHS can and will refuse care to a person who is aggressive, they may refuse treatment to someone who is only being aggressive because of a medical condition they are suffering. For example a diabetic whose blood sugar/ insulin levels are out of balance may become aggressive even though this is out of character. There are probably other situations where people could be aggressive due to a medical episodes, does the NHS endorse this?
Elderly people with Alzheimer’s will sometimes present in an aggressive way, often to the acute embarrassment of their relatives. I’ve witnessed streams of expletives, attempts to punch and strangle staff, approaching other patients and accusing them of theft, etc.
Prior to their medical condition, these elderly people were often fully-integrated members of society, often with responsible jobs and loving families. Aggression in itself should never be used as an excuse for non-treatment.
It depends. Will it save money?
What a complete disgrace of a man and the NHS here also.
Well said. (Lolly x)
Dr Upton and his ilk are those who are constantly enjoining us to âBe Kindâ, rather like the Communist Party of old, who urged âWorld Peaceâ.
Sounds great, until you challenge them, when they turn on their so-called âaggressorsâ.
He is quoted as saying he only wanted the nurse to give him respect. I suggest it is he who should be respecting her privacy instead of forcing his presence where it is obviously unwelcome. I gather she is also accused of bullying which I find hilarious as I gather he is over 6′ and she is 5’4″.
It beats me how he has qualified as a doctor when he sounds as if he would fail “O” level biology.
I saw today that the doctor âjust wants respectâ (or words to that effect). That surely applies to her female (and male) colleagues. Perhaps she needs to show a bit of care for other people; one might reasonably expect that of a doctor!
He.
He, not she. Why maintain a polite quasi-legal fiction for the beneft of such a person?
Iâm just naturally courteous đ
Don’t buy the trannie shit. Deny their request for respect.
If he/she/it wasn’t such an idiot, he might get some respect.
But he doesn’t just want respect, does he.
He wants everyone to be compelled to use language and speech in ways he approves of.
He wants everyone to affirm a range of fantastical beliefs he holds about biological sex, including that he is literally a woman.
He wants unfettered access to facilities set aside for women’s safety and dignity.
This is the key to the trannie madness. They want respect.
Normal people should deny this request. We should laugh at the trannies. They are ludicrous. Laugh at them and make it loud.
The doctor is a man. Don’t pander to his mental delusions.
It is very serious to withhold evidence from a case. There is an obligation to disclose. It is possible that the poor quality of management in the NHS thought it OK to hide stuff
We canât show them that it may damage our defence and anyway I donât think itâs relevant. It was another investigation. Anyway they wonât know about it if we donât tell them. Thatâs the sort of thinking of someone who believes a man can identify as a woman and needs to be affirmed.
Any Doctor claiming that someone with male chromozones can be a woman -should not be allowed anywhere near a human patient.
Overall humanity will thank the trans lobby. Like Corbyn, Diane Abbott and Hamas they do their own cause more damage than their opponents could manage in the theatre of hearts and minds. Plus they all keep records in tv court, in demos or on social media in plain snip-sight. So if the hammer comes down it will know where to strike. Humans, like dogs and bees, are social animals. Stepping outside the pack means starvation. Opposing the pack = death. The pack can only continue to exist if it reproduces. So where do the queer/trans/islamist death cults fit in evolutionary terms? They don’t. This doesn’t mean they are harmless, look at the lengths NHS Scotland has gone to. It means they are very much on the back foot and the more hurt they cause the weaker they become.
A central plank of the CCP’s TikTok strategy is to encourage Western societies to tear them apart through the promotion of trans on social media. As the Scottish nationalist government is an adherent to communist China, none of this policymaking has come as a surprise over the past 5 years.
The courts and many legal experts in the Anglosphere somehow have reached the conclusion they are all-powerful regardless of how the laws were written or what the people want.
Is true that the doctor’s real name is Upton O’Good?
No doubt, the MSM are not over exerting themselves to report the story so UnHerd will have to do it.