NHS Fife publish tribunal statement on Sandie Peggie case

The Herald Scotland

18-07-2025

The tribunal, being held in Dundee, centres on Ms Peggie's suspension by NHS Fife after she raised concerns about sharing a female changing room with a transgender colleague, Dr Beth Upton, on Christmas Eve 2023.
READ MORE
Ms Peggie has since been cleared of misconduct but is pursuing legal action against both the health board and Dr Upton, claiming discrimination based on her gender-critical beliefs.
NHS Fife said in its statement that while the case had attracted 'significant and very polarised debate' on social media, 'what began as debate has evolved into much more worrying behaviour, including a threat of physical harm and sexual violence, which has required the involvement of Police Scotland'.
The board argued it had been the subject of 'unacceptable personal attacks and trolling' and reiterated its commitment to supporting all staff while defending its actions in court.
However, during Friday's hearing, the claimant's barrister, Charlotte Elves, said it was 'a matter of some concern' that the health board appeared to be associating the actions of anonymous individuals online with named parties involved in the legal case.
She pointed to paragraph three of the NHS Fife statement, which references the involvement of Sex Matters, noting that the claimant is supported by the group and that its CEO, Maya Forstater, has already given evidence.
The group's chair, barrister Naomi Cunningham, is leading Ms Peggie's case.
Ms Elves told the tribunal: 'Paragraph four of the statement seems to conclude that this has resulted in more worrying behaviour that has involved Police Scotland. It is a matter of some concern that a party to proceedings seems to link a witness in these proceedings with the conduct of members of the public, including threats of physical violence.'
She added: 'This is quite unusual conduct of a party in proceedings and we are concerned that it is irresponsible and unsafe in the context of what we already know.'
The tribunal was told that the case is being held in [[Dundee]] rather than Edinburgh due to threats made against members of the claimant's legal team.
NHS Fife's senior counsel, Jane Russell KC, responded that she had only just seen the statement and requested more time to consider it. However, she rejected the suggestion that it contained anything defamatory or untrue.
'It is a bit of a stretch to say that paragraph three is leading to paragraph four,' she said. 'There is no way NHS Fife's statement could be seen to directly link the threats to those involved with Sex Matters.'
She argued that the context for the statement was important, stating: 'Because this has taken place in public, Fife's witnesses have been exposed to a very unsafe environment. I have received threats, as have witnesses.'
Sex Matters, which describes itself as a human rights charity focused on sex-based rights under the Equality Act, condemned the board's intervention.
In a statement, Maya Forstater said: 'This is an extraordinary intervention from NHS Fife, even by the board's standards.
'NHS Fife has dug itself into a reputational black hole. If the only way forward the board can see is to lash out, including by criticising Sex Matters, which has at all times acted with propriety and in pursuit of its charitable objects, that suggests desperation.'
The health board's statement, published on its website, also attempted to rebut a number of claims circulating on social media and in the press, including the suggestion that it could drop the tribunal proceedings.
'NHS Fife did not initiate the ongoing tribunal proceedings and is instead one of two 'respondents' being sued,' the statement said. 'Only the claimant can choose to withdraw the case.'
The board also pushed back on the idea that Ms Peggie's suspension was directly caused by her complaint about a trans colleague's use of the female changing room.
'While the claimant raised concerns about a trans woman's use of a locker room, this was not the reason that NHS Fife's internal investigation was initiated,' it said. 'As made clear during tribunal proceedings, the disciplinary process was initiated due to concerns raised about interactions with a colleague and patient care.'
NHS Fife confirmed that it had now concluded its internal disciplinary process — separate from the tribunal — and had issued a public statement earlier this month confirming no misconduct had been found.
Read more:
Elsewhere in the statement, the board addressed the cost of defending the case, revealing that total legal spending had reached £258,831.31 as of June 30, though only the first £25,000 is being met from NHS Fife's own budget. The remainder is covered by CNORIS, the NHS Scotland-wide indemnity scheme.
NHS Fife also defended its attempts to restrict live coverage of the tribunal by the Tribunal Tweets account, saying it had raised concerns with the court about the accuracy of some posts. The account has since been allowed to continue under tribunal supervision.
The hearing continues and is expected to conclude on Tuesday July 30, with a written judgment to follow in the months ahead.