Health board seeks to restrict online viewing of tribunal involving trans doctor
A health board is seeking to bar the public from online viewing of future hearings in an employment tribunal about a transgender doctor using a female changing room.
NHS Fife has requested only media be allowed to watch the livestream of the case brought by nurse Sandie Peggie against the health board when it resumes in July.
It said technical issues and 'interruptions caused by non-media observers' caused 'significant delays' to proceedings at earlier tribunal hearings in Dundee in February.
Ms Peggie was suspended after she complained about having to share a changing room with transgender medic Dr Beth Upton at the hospital where they both worked.
She lodged a complaint of sexual harassment or harassment related to a protected belief under Section 26 of the Equality Act 2010 regarding three incidents when they shared a changing room: indirect harassment, victimisation, and whistleblowing.
Ms Peggie was suspended from her work at the Victoria Hospital in Kirkcaldy, Fife, on January 3, 2024 after Dr Upton made an allegation of bullying and harassment, the tribunal heard in February this year.
The tribunal hearings in February could initially be viewed virtually by members of the public, however the judge later restricted virtual access to accredited media.
The health board has asked the tribunal for this approach to continue, but said members of the public would still be able to attend the hearings in person.
NHS Fife said: 'During the hearing in February, the employment tribunal restricted cloud video platform (virtual viewing) access to press/journalists due to technical issues, as well as interruptions caused by non-media observers.
'The technical issues and interruptions caused significant delays which impacted the tribunal's progress. A request has therefore been made that this approach be maintained in July.
'If these requests are granted, accredited media and press outlets will still be permitted to report on matters and in-person public access to the hearing will remain available.'
The health board has also asked the tribunal to revoke the Tribunal Tweets group's permission to live-tweet proceedings, saying there had been a public complaint about the posts.
Tribunal Tweets told the Daily Telegraph, which first reported the story: 'The respondents have applied to have our permission to report using live text-based communications revoked.
'We will contest that application and believe that we have respected the relevant order and hope to be allowed to continue to report.'
Tribunal Tweets, policy analysis collective Murray Blackburn Mackenzie and the organisations For Women Scotland and Sex Matters have together written to the Nick Goodwin, chief executive of His Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) suggesting improvements to the online viewing system.
Lisa Mackenzie, of Murray Blackburn Mackenzie, said: 'We have recently written to HMCTS asking them to iron out some of the technological challenges faced by those seeking to observe proceedings remotely.
'This is an important case that has generated considerable public interest.
'Seeking to restrict access to the HMCTS livestream, when there are very few seats in the public gallery, is a deeply cynical move by NHS Fife and one that we hope will be resisted by the judge.
'It should be pressing for the technical issues to be resolved instead of seeking to put in place further barriers to open justice.'
HMCTS has been approached for comment.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Courier
20 hours ago
- The Courier
How a Kinross woman's beloved pet dog is inspiring bid to change law
A campaigning mum from Kinross hopes the memory of her much-loved dog will help change the law for people who need 'emotional support animals'. Elizabeth Crammond took up the challenge to change UK equalities law after sadly losing Daisy in March. The Yorkshire terrier, who joined the family in 2009, was a constant companion and helped Elizabeth cope with stressful situations. She has fybromialgia and other debilitating conditions, and was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder. The presence of her canine companion was a constant source of comfort after her own mother died from cancer in 2011. Daisy, classed as an emotional support animal with a doctor's note to prove it, would still be turned away from places including restaurants and public venues. 'After my mum passed away, Daisy was my emotional support,' Elizabeth told The Courier. 'She was the tiniest thing, she went everywhere with me to the point I lived my life around her. 'I was having a lot of anxiety and panic attacks, and that's where my fybromialgia would come in.' The condition flared up under stress, she says, causing even more anxiety about leaving the house and living a normal life. 'Daisy knew when an attack was coming and she would bring me back into the zone,' Elizabeth said. Daisy would even help support her own little daughter, now four, as she was growing up. Elizabeth, 42, who works in education, realised she would have to change the Equality Act 2010 to put support animals on the same footing as guide dogs. She's doing that by enlisting help from her local MP Pete Wishart and lodging a petition at Westminster to show UK-wide support. Elizabeth says the change of the law will also help people with unseen conditions, avoiding embarrassing situations in public places. Her petition – called Daisy Companion Law – is live on the Commons website.
The National
6 days ago
- The National
Citizens Advice Scotland in trans rights row over bathroom change
Citizens Advice Scotland (CAS) staff told staff last month that the charity would be enforcing a policy of 'male only' and 'female only' toilets on the basis of sex assigned at birth, according to an email seen by The Ferret. CAS's chief executive, Derek Mitchell, reportedly said in the email, sent May 6, that the charity was bound by 'legal constraints' following the landmark ruling by the UK Supreme Court in April on how sex should be interpreted under the Equality Act 2010. The ruling stated that, under the Equality Act 2010, the definition of 'woman' refers to 'biological sex', a decision gender critical campaigners claimed had brought 'clarity on the law'. READ MORE: Labour MPs visit Israel on lobbying trip in middle of Gaza genocide However, legal experts have pointed out that the ruling on the definition of 'man' and 'woman' relates to the 2010 Equality Act only, while campaign groups have also raised concerns over the interpretation of the ruling. Mitchell said the decision to enforce male and female-only bathrooms was in response to the ruling and subsequent interim 'guidance' offered by the UK's human rights regulator, the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC). CAS's chief executive reportedly clarified that a separate single-occupancy bathroom would also be available 'for any colleague'. 'As an employer, CAS is required to comply with the law, and we need to ensure our practices and policies reflect current legal standards,' Mitchell said. 'This is not an expression of any view on the High Court ruling, it is our legal obligation as an employer.' Mitchell reportedly sent a second update two days later acknowledging the upset that had been caused due to the decision, but doubled down on claims that the charity was bound by the law to introduce changes. The decision has left staff at CAS feeling hurt, afraid, disappointed, and concerned by Mitchell's claim that the decision had been taken out of the charity's hands by legal changes, The Ferret reported. A spokesperson for CAS said they recognised 'this issue touches on deeply personal experiences and we will continue to monitor and review our approach should guidance change'. Lawyers and campaigners have said that the EHRC's update was neither intended as formal guidance nor legally binding, and therefore gives employers options on how they proceed. One staff member at CAS claimed neither the trade union nor the equality, diversity and inclusion committee were consulted ahead of the decision, according to The Ferret. Another staff member told The Ferret how CAS had built its workplace culture around inclusion and dignity, and that this policy change was effectively a 'slap in the face'. 'It's almost like it's polluted my work,' said one staff member. 'Because obviously when we consult, we're very respectful of any kind of pronouns. So I would like to think that we would treat our colleagues the same, and that the attitude from management would be the same.' Another said the decision to put this out 'without going through proper channels to make sure that the information that he's putting in there is correct' made them feel 'less safe within the organisation'. The Good Law Project have raised concerns since the ruling by the UK Supreme Court over how it is interpreted and whether or not it will impact other legislation that governs access to toilets and changing rooms in the workplace. Jen Ang, a human rights lawyer and director of legal firm Lawmanity, was shown the leaked emails by The Ferret. She said: 'The Supreme Court decision does not require employers to provide only separate toilets for men and women – it only clarified the meaning of 'sex' for purposes of the Equality Act and in so doing, shifted our understanding of what is required if single sex, mixed sex or only sex facilities are being provided by an employer. 'Employers must consider a range of factors in deciding what toilet facilities to provide, and be prepared to justify their decisions.' She claimed companies or charities that restricted access to some facilities on the basis of a protected characteristic like sex or gender reassignment without being able to justify the decision as a 'proportionate means to a legitimate aim', may be open to legal challenge in the future. READ MORE: Police issue statement after Scottish men killed in Spain shooting 'This is a good reason why organisations should start early with good faith efforts to gather the information they will need to make these decisions,' Ang added. 'By engaging with staff and service users to understand their requirements – and also why clear and practical guidance and support is urgently needed from our UK equalities and human rights regulators, and from our national governments.'
South Wales Argus
02-06-2025
- South Wales Argus
Newport house confirmed as lawful HMO for over 10 years
A certificate of lawfulness was issued for the property in Clyffard Crescent, Newport, after evidence was submitted showing continuous use as a four-bedroom, five-person HMO under use class C4. The three-storey, mid-terraced house comprises a basement with a kitchen, bedroom, shower, toilet, and garden access; a ground floor with a communal lounge and a bedroom; and a first floor with two bedrooms and a bathroom. The application was submitted by the owners, and was assessed under planning application number 25/0244. The application was made under Section 191(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, which stipulates a 10-year period for changes of use other than to a single dwelling. Key evidence supporting the application included floor plans and drawings detailing the property's internal layout, as well as a statutory declaration confirming continuous use as a four-bedroom, five-person HMO for at least 10 years. The property also had a series of HMO licences issued on July 3, 2016, July 4, 2021, and another dated August 1, 2011. Tenancy agreements covering the periods from September 29, 2014, to April 4, 2019, and from April 1, 2019, to September 1, 2026, were also submitted as evidence. Additionally, a council tax record noted the property as being vacant since October 2024, with plans to let it again shortly after March 2025. The planning authority accepted the evidence on the balance of probabilities, determining that the property met the criteria for lawful existing use as a C4 HMO due to continuous 10-year usage. No objections were received regarding the application. The decision was also considered compliant with Newport's Well-Being Plan 2018–23. The Welsh Government's 2015 study on HMO concentrations influenced changes requiring small HMOs (3–6 unrelated individuals sharing amenities) to have planning permission under C4 from February 2016. However, properties in lawful HMO use before February 2016 may continue such use without needing retrospective permission, provided continuity of use is demonstrated. The evidence submitted by the Simmons family, including a statutory declaration from the current owners confirming continuous HMO use since October 20, 2011, was found to be sufficient in proving the lawful use of the property as a C4 HMO since at least October 20, 2011. The use of the property as an HMO was found to have no significant impacts identified under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, Equality Act 2010, or Planning (Wales) Act 2015.
