Worker wins £8,000 after boss read her private WhatsApp messages and tried to fire her over ‘Dragon Porn’ fantasy audiobook
A finance administrator has been awarded nearly £8,000 in compensation after an employment tribunal ruled that her employer constructively unfairly dismissed her, following a botched disciplinary process sparked in part by her boss reading private WhatsApp messages – including banter about listening to a “steamy” fantasy audiobook jokingly called “dragon porn.”
Kirsty Coleman worked as a finance administrator at a small research and development company based near Glasgow, Scotland, specialising in thermoelectric technology. She joined in September 2022 and resigned in June 2025 amid escalating tensions.
Boss stumbles on private WhatsApp chats while hunting for a spreadsheet
The controversy began around 31 May 2025, when Coleman’s Managing Director accessed her work computer to locate a spreadsheet. He noticed her WhatsApp app open and viewed roughly 30 pages of personal conversations.
Among them was a message from Coleman saying she was “listening to my book and it has just got steamy (again),” to which a colleague replied, “haha oh ur big dragon porn.” This referred to an audiobook in the fantasy or science fiction genre with romantic or explicit elements – not actual pornography.
Her MD also saw an out-of-hours message where Coleman vented frustration about a colleague: “I swear to fucking god, I am going to slam Kyles face against his desk if he keeps it up,” in reference to repeated door-slamming.
Suspension for gross misconduct follows
Interpreting these as potential threats, unacceptable language, and a breach of the company’s Internet Usage Policy (which barred pornographic material and allowed monitoring of company equipment), the MD shared screenshots with the Finance Director (who handled HR matters).
This led to Coleman’s suspension on 3 June 2025, on full pay, with allegations of gross misconduct, including threats, inappropriate language, equipment misuse, and negativity.
The disciplinary process quickly fell apart. Suspension letters and supporting documents were vague, lacking specific details or evidence upfront, something the tribunal later criticised as breaching ACAS guidelines for fair procedures.
One key document appeared to pre-judge the case, listing grounds for gross misconduct (including wrongly treating the “dragon porn” reference as pornography) and stating the behaviour warranted dismissal.
Coleman asked for full details and evidence, but the process remained unclear. She chose to be accompanied at the 9 June disciplinary hearing by a qualified trade union representative and trainee solicitor. However, the hearing panel refused to let him participate unless he handed over extra personal documents for verification, even though he showed his driving licence, trade union card, and confirmed his email. The hearing never took place, prompting Coleman’s immediate resignation.
She claimed constructive unfair dismissal, arguing several acts breached the implied term of mutual trust and confidence: accessing her private messages, using them in disciplinary action, an unfair process, and denying her chosen companion.
Tribunal finds constructive unfair dismissal
The Glasgow Employment Tribunal (Case No: 4102789/2025), in a judgment issued 14 January 2026, ruled in her favour on constructive unfair dismissal. It lacked jurisdiction to rule the WhatsApp access itself unlawful (that would require a separate privacy or data protection claim in another court), but found the overall process unreasonable and unfair.
The key fatal flaw was refusing her chosen companion, violating Section 10 of the Employment Relations Act 1999 and natural justice principles, denying a fair hearing. Combined with vague allegations and apparent pre-judgment, this fundamental breach destroyed trust.
The tribunal stressed the “dragon porn” reference was clearly a lighthearted joke about a fantasy audiobook, not a breach involving actual pornographic content.
The angry message about the door-slamming colleague was just “an expression of anger,” not a real threat. The judge also noted the boss had “no legitimate basis” to trawl through pages of personal messages when only looking for a work file, violating her reasonable right to privacy for personal chats.
This genre, often called ‘romantasy’ (romance + fantasy), has exploded in popularity, especially in audiobooks. Books like Sarah J. Maas’s A Court of Thorns and Roses (frequently nicknamed “fairy porn” by fans for its spicy scenes) topped Spotify’s audiobook charts in 2024 and beyond, with Rebecca Yarros’s Fourth Wing (featuring dragon riders and steamy drama) also dominating lists. Staff were allowed to listen to audiobooks, and it was known Coleman was an avid fantasy reader.
The parties agreed on compensation: a basic award of £1,230.76, compensatory award of £4,923.04 plus £500 for loss of statutory rights, and a 25% uplift (£1,355.76) for ACAS Code failure, totalling £8,109.60 (including notice pay elements).
Lessons for small employers: privacy and fair process matter
The case highlights risks for small employers when handling personal data on work devices and sticking to fair disciplinary rules, especially companion rights and privacy expectations. Even with just around 10 staff, the company was criticised for an overly aggressive response to what the tribunal saw as minor or misinterpreted issues.
The ruling reinforces that employment law protections apply even in small firms: staff have some reasonable privacy for personal communications on work equipment, and processes must be fair, or it can prove costly.
