Case 8000074/2023 · Employment Tribunal

: Ms M Spirdonova Miss Kostadinka Dzhoykeva v D A Baillie Limited — 2023

Case reference: 8000074/2023
Decision date: 22 August 2023
Jurisdiction: Scotland
Judge: Employment Judge Sutherland
Venue: Dundee remotely

Indexed: 22 May 2026

Parties

2 named

Claimant

: Ms M Spirdonova Miss Kostadinka Dzhoykeva

Respondent

D A Baillie Limited

Key findings

Tribunal's reasoning

At a preliminary hearing on 14 August 2023, Employment Judge Sutherland heard the respondent's application to strike out the complaints. No oral evidence was taken; the tribunal relied on a joint bundle and oral submissions. The tribunal allowed amendments to add the utility-cost deduction complaint and the Regulation 11 weekly rest complaint, but held there had been no application to amend to add automatic unfair dismissal by reason of whistleblowing because the claimant said she had resigned, and any possible constructive dismissal amendment would be dealt with separately.

On the discrimination and harassment allegations, the tribunal held that the claimant had identified facts capable of supporting an inference of discrimination. It referred in particular to allegations that Stanislav Bohaterevich made comments such as 'Bulgarian rubbish' and 'You die you fucking Bulgarian; Go to your God', and to allegations of repeated physical and verbal conduct during the claimant's intermittent employment from 15 November 2018 to 24 November 2022. The tribunal said the case was fact-sensitive, that further specification on frequency and comparator issues could be addressed by case management orders, and that strike out was not justified because the allegations were not conclusively contradicted by the contemporaneous documents.

On the pay and working-time complaints, the tribunal accepted that the claimant had identified periods in 2021 and 2022 for holiday pay, alleged weekend and longer-hours overtime, and utility deductions shown on payslips from September 2022. It noted that the contracts referred to hourly pay, overtime after 8 hours in a day or 48 hours in a week, pro-rated holiday entitlement, and accommodation or utility deductions, and it said the documentary material did not make the claims hopeless. The respondent did not insist on strike out for the utility-deduction and weekly-rest complaints, and the overall application for strike out of the complaints was refused. No remedy was decided at this stage.

Claims and outcomes

7 findings recorded

Claim type	Issue or finding	Outcome	Protected characteristic	Award
Race discrimination	Strike-out application refused. The tribunal held the allegations, including comments such as 'Bulgarian rubbish' and 'You die you fucking Bulgarian; Go to your God', were capable of supporting an inference of race discrimination. No merits determination was made.	Other	Race	—
Religion or belief discrimination	Strike-out application refused. The tribunal held the allegations, including comments such as 'Go to your God', were capable of supporting an inference of religion or belief discrimination. No merits determination was made.	Other	Religion or belief	—
Harassment	Strike-out application refused. The tribunal treated the harassment allegations as fact-sensitive and said they should proceed to a final hearing. No merits determination was made.	Other	—	—
Holiday pay	Strike-out application refused. The claim concerned payment for holidays during seasonal breaks in 2021 and 2022; the tribunal noted no separate holiday payment appeared on the payslips and the respondent said it had paid rolled-up holiday pay, but had not specified the rolled-up element.	Other	—	—
Unlawful deduction from wages	Strike-out application refused. This part of the claim concerned failure to pay overtime; the tribunal noted the contract and Agricultural Wages (Scotland) Order referred to overtime after 8 hours a day or 48 hours a week, and the claimant's assertion was not inconsistent with the documents.	Other	—	—

Legal tests applied

14 references

Official outcome judgment PDF

Gov.uk primary record

The 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.