Ms Nikolova has a grocery store in the Bulgarian city Dupnitsa in the district of “Gisdova Mahala”. This district is predominantly inhabited by Rom*nja. Ms Nikolova does not identify as Romni herself.

In 1999 and 2000, CHEZ RB installed electricity meter boxes in Gisdova Mahala on concrete poles of the overhead line network at a height of up to seven metres, contrary to the common practice in other parts of the city, where electricity meters were fixed at a height of 1.70 m and hung mostly in customers’ homes, on fences or facades.

Ms Nikolova complained to the KZD about this practice in 2008. She claimed that this practice was because most of the residents of the district were Rom*nja and that she was thus indirectly discriminated against because of her origin. The plaintiff complained that due to the height of the fixed electricity boxes, she could not monitor her consumption and therefore could not check electricity bills that she perceived as excessive.

The decision of the KZD, that it was in fact a case of illegal indirect discrimination, was rejected by the highest administrative court on 19^th May 2011. 

The reasoning was that the comparison to which origin the plaintiff has been discriminated was missing.

Hereinafter the KZD argued again before the Court that Ms Nikolova was indirectly treated less favourably by CHEZ RB than customers who had better access to their electricity meters because of the location of her grocery store.  CHEZ RB then brought an action before the Administrative Court in Sofia.

The court referred the case to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) for a preliminary ruling.  It pointed out to the ECJ that Ms Nikolova’s application wrongly referred to discrimination on the grounds of nationality, although the case was more likely to touch on the protected ground of "ethnic origin" of the Rom*nja as the majority population of the district in question. Rom*nja are recognised as an ethnic group in Bulgaria and have the status of an ethnic minority. Moreover, there are no official statistics on the exact composition of the inhabitants of Gizdova Mahala, but the district is unofficially referred to as a Rom*nja district. Therefore, it can be assumed that the questionable level of electricity meters in this neighbourhood is the result of discriminatory intent.

With regard to Coleman and Feryn, the court further pointed out that the person discriminated against does not have to be the bearer of the protected characteristic on the basis of which he or she is discriminated against.