Legal update: The Empire Strikes HR: When Workplace Banter Crosses the Legal Line


An employment tribunal has ruled that comparing a colleague to the Star Wars villain Darth Vader in a workplace setting can constitute a legal detriment, offering a clear reminder that even seemingly light-hearted workplace activities can carry serious implications. 

The case involved Lorna Rooke, an NHS Blood and Transplant employee, who was awarded nearly £29,000 after a co-worker completed a Star Wars-themed personality quiz on her behalf and publicly aligned her personality type with that of Darth Vader. The employment judge, Kathryn Ramsden, stated that the comparison was both “insulting” and “upsetting,” underlining that likening an employee to a notorious villain can create a harmful work environment. 

In 2021, Rooke’s team participated in a team-building exercise involving a Star Wars-themed adaptation of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. When Rooke stepped away to take a personal call, a colleague filled out the quiz for her and announced that her personality matched Darth Vader — a character known for authoritarianism and aggression. 

While the quiz framed Vader as a “very focused individual” capable of team leadership, the tribunal concluded that the association with such a feared fictional character created reputational harm. Although Rooke’s resignation wasn’t directly attributed to the incident, the tribunal recognised the act as a “detriment” under employment law, harm that an employee reasonably experiences in the workplace. 

Rooke succeeded in her claim related to detrimental treatment following a protected disclosure, though she did not win on grounds of unfair dismissal or disability discrimination. 

This case underscores how easily everyday workplace interactions, even those meant to be light-hearted, can stray into legally risky territory. For employers, it offers a valuable opportunity to reflect on how team dynamics, humour, and consent are managed in professional settings. Here are some important lessons to keep in mind: 

  • Team-building activities must be handled with care. While personality quizzes can be a fun morale booster, they should be strictly voluntary, and results should never be used to label or publicly categorise employees. 
  • Humour is subjective and potentially harmful. What may seem like a harmless pop culture reference to one person can be deeply insulting to another. Employers must foster a culture of mutual respect and be sensitive to perceptions. 
  • Consent is essential. Having a colleague complete a psychological or personality assessment on someone else’s behalf, especially without permission, crosses  professional boundaries. 
  • Demeaning characterisations can constitute legal detriment. Even if said in jest, public comparisons to negative figures (real or fictional) can be grounds for legal claims if they impact an employee’s dignity or reputation. 
  • Training matters. Equip managers and team leaders with training on inclusion, professionalism, and the legal risks of workplace conduct, even during informal or “fun” activities. 

This case is a reminder that workplace culture is shaped not just by policies, but by how teams interact daily. What might seem like harmless fun can carry legal consequences, particularly when it undermines respect or autonomy. 

Under employment law, a detriment occurs when an employee is subjected to a disadvantage or harm in the workplace, whether through humiliation, exclusion, or reputational damage. Employers have a legal duty to prevent behaviour that could cause such detriment, especially in contexts involving protected disclosures or other legally sensitive areas. 

Even in the absence of discriminatory intent, actions that cause distress or embarrassment can be grounds for tribunal claims, with potential financial, reputational, and operational consequences for the organisation. In Rooke’s case, the employer was held liable for nearly £29,000 in compensation despite the incident being framed as part of a casual team-building exercise. 

Employers should therefore ensure that workplace activities, formal or informal, are conducted within a framework of respect, consent, and legal awareness. Proactive training, clear boundaries around participation, and swift responses to concerns can reduce risk and help maintain a healthy, lawful workplace environment.