About — Justice for Entrepreneurs CIC

Who we serve

Entrepreneurs and business owners — particularly those connected to the United Kingdom — who face unlawful institutional persecution, abuse of process, corruption, or miscarriage of justice in their countries of origin: unlawful asset freezes, criminal proceedings without lawful basis, violations of the right to a fair trial and the right to property. The community is not restricted to any nationality.

Governance

Directors run day-to-day operations and answer to the CIC Regulator.
Members (guarantors) each guarantee a nominal £1 — their entire financial liability — and control the direction of the company.
Founder and director: Dobrin Dobrev, an entrepreneur who spent 17 years facing institutional persecution and turned that experience into an organisation for others.

Dobrin Dobrev — founder and director

Safeguards

Statutory asset lock — no dividends, no private benefit; on dissolution assets pass to Citizens Advice (Charity No. 279057).
Non-political — declared on formation (form CIC36).
Transparency — annual public filings with Companies House.
Not a law firm — we document, signpost and coordinate; we do not provide legal representation or legal advice.

The story behind this organisation

JFE exists because its founder was not pursued by a competitor, a creditor or a single court. He was pursued by a state — its revenue authority, its prosecutors, its specialised courts, in several cities at once, for seventeen years and counting. No individual answers that alone. That is the entire reason this organisation is here.

He started his first company in January 1991 and has never worked for anyone else. In 2009 every bank account he held was frozen, and he was told to hand over the business. He refused. Seventeen years later it is still not over.

What followed did not happen in one courtroom. Proceedings ran in parallel — against him in Sofia, before the City Court and before the specialised criminal courts; against his business partner in two other cities, hundreds of kilometres away. Different courts, different regions, the same origin: one company. His partner was pursued because of his connection to that company, not despite it. Anyone who has been through this recognises the arrangement immediately. It is not a series of coincidences; it is coordination.

The specialised criminal courts that heard part of these proceedings were later abolished outright by the national parliament. That judgment was not ours to make. It was made by the state itself.

The company's operations ended. In 2017 he and his family left the country and have not returned. All of it is documented — the acts, the rulings, the dates, the case numbers.

This did not happen in a failed state. It happened inside the European Union, in a member state bound by the same treaties, the same Charter of Fundamental Rights and the same courts as every other. That is precisely why it matters, and precisely why it is possible to act.

One case, however well documented, is dismissed as a private grievance. Dozens of cases showing the same methods, the same sequence and the same people are no longer a grievance. They are evidence of a pattern — and a pattern is something institutions outside that jurisdiction can be required to examine.

We are open to entrepreneurs anywhere. The mechanisms differ from country to country; the sequence is remarkably consistent.