An employment tribunal is due to take place in Edinburgh next month to hear the case of Sandie Peggie who claims she was “subjected to sexual harassment” and is taking legal action against NHS Fife.
Ms Peggie was put under a disciplinary investigation after she objected to sharing a women’s changing room with a trans colleague, Dr Beth Upton.
Hearings have already taken place with a bid to have the proceedings carried out in private being rejected by Judge Antoine Tinnion.
In his ruling, he stated that “having considered the matter at length, and being acutely aware of the effect its decision will have” the Tribunal’s decision was that details of the hearing should be available.
“The interference with Dr Upton’s right to respect for her private life and status as a gender woman which will be effected by not making the derogations sought, thereby allowing Dr Upton’s status as a trans woman and the trans woman doctor involved in this case to be publicly disclosed and likely public knowledge, is justified and necessary in a democratic society,” he stated.
READ MORE: ‘No plans’ to close unit at Dunfermline’s Queen Margaret Hospital
“Justice should be administered in public, with members of the public and press free to attend trials, and fully disclose and report proceedings with no restrictions, with a judgment and reasons which name the parties and anyone else the court deems fit to identify by name – is a fundamental principle of civil and criminal justice in the UK, and applies even where parts of the final hearing may be painful or humiliating for the parties or a witness.”
Ms Peggie’s solicitor, Margaret Gribbon from McGrade Employment Solicitors in Glasgow, said the decision to allow the case to be heard without any reporting constrictions was a “welcome” one.
“The public has a right to be fully informed of the details of this important case which at its core is a policy championed by a taxpayer funded health board which, in name of inclusivity, permits any man who identifies as a woman to use a female only changing room,” she said.
“My client will argue that this policy is unlawful and that she has been victimised, harassed, and threatened with her job and livelihood for objecting to it.
“My client’s case illustrates the shocking reality for many women who merely objects to Employers’ policies which deny them privacy and respect in the workplace by failing to provide single sex spaces.”
Campaign group Sex Matters said a decision to have the case heard in private would have turned “open justice on its head.”
A submission from them to the judge added: “A requirement that women may be required to share changing facilities with natal males and the adverse impact upon women who seek to challenge this requirement is of major concern to many women, and is a matter which Sex Matters campaigns upon.
“It is an issue of ongoing political and legal debate. That public debate, and policy development, should be informed by access to, and accurate reporting of, legal cases which go to this issue.”
Commenting on the case, an NHS Fife spokesperson said: “NHS Fife considers it inappropriate to comment ahead of or during the employment tribunal. It is important to recognise that at the heart of this case is two employees, that should be treated with kindness and respect.
“As an organisation, NHS Fife remains committed to upholding its duty of care to all employees.”
The tribunal hearing is due to start in Edinburgh on February 3.