Case 2406696/2024 · Employment Tribunal
Miss Erika Silva del Angel v Volare Preston Limited — 2025
- Case reference
- 2406696/2024
- Decision date
- 13 November 2025
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Cline
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Miss Erika Silva del Angel
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningEmployment Judge Cline, sitting alone at Manchester by CVP on 29 September 2025, struck out all six claims under Rule 37(1)(a) because each was found to have no reasonable prospect of success. The claims were for detriment following a protected disclosure, failure to make reasonable adjustments, indirect discrimination, unlawful deductions from wages, unpaid holiday pay, and failure to pay a bonus.
The judgment is a short oral decision record and does not set out further findings of fact or any separate remedy analysis. It records only that the strike out orders were made, and that written reasons would not be provided unless requested in time.
Because no claim succeeded and no monetary award was recorded, there is no basic award, compensatory award, injury to feelings award, interest, or total sum stated in the judgment.
Claims and outcomes
6 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Whistleblowing | Claim described as detriment following a protected disclosure; struck out under Rule 37(1)(a) for having no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | — | — |
| Disability discrimination | Claim for failure to make reasonable adjustments; struck out under Rule 37(1)(a) for having no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | Disability | — |
| Other | Claim for indirect discrimination; the extracted judgment does not specify the protected characteristic, so this is classified as other. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | Claim for unlawful deductions from wages; struck out under Rule 37(1)(a) for having no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | — | — |
| Holiday pay | Claim for unpaid holiday pay; struck out under Rule 37(1)(a) for having no reasonable prospect of success. | Struck out | — | — |
| Other | Claim for failure to pay a bonus; the judgment does not map this to a more specific enum category, so it is classified as other. | Struck out | — | — |
Legal tests applied
1 reference- Rule 37(1)(a)
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.