In a dramatic legal battle, a former accounts executive of a Dublin hotel, Andja Gulic Pejovic, and her husband, Dusan Pejovic, are accused of misappropriating €597,000 from their employer.However, in a surprising twist, Ms. Pejovic is counterclaiming that she is owed €1 million under a consulting agreement with the hotel, the High Court has heard.
Last October, the court issued freezing orders against the couple, targeting funds in four bank accounts linked to them. The orders were designed to prevent the Pejovics from reducing their assets below €582,000, the amount allegedly still unrecovered by The Address Connolly hotel, formerly known as the North Star Hotel.
The hotel’s operators, BC McGettigan Ltd, initiated the legal action, describing Ms. Pejovic as a “trusted employee” for nearly eight years. Her husband was included in the case as the hotel alleged he was “bound up in this fraud.”
when the case returned to court recently,it was revealed that the couple had lost legal representation,as their lawyers had ceased acting for them due to a lack of communication.Neither defendant appeared in court that day.
Frank Kennedy, representing BC McGettigan, informed the court that his client had received a “counter motion” from Ms. Pejovic. In this document, she claimed she had a consulting agreement with the hotel, entitling her to €487 per hour for 300 hours of work each month. She asserted she was owed €1 million for this work, in addition to the funds she is accused of embezzling.
Brian mcgettigan, a director at the hotel, dismissed these claims as “entirely false” in a sworn affidavit. Mr. Kennedy described the defendants’ defense as demonstrating “to a very considerable extent the audacity of the defendants in the way they have defended these proceedings.”
The court had previously ordered the couple to disclose their assets, but their submissions made no mention of the €1 million consulting claim. Mr. Kennedy requested specific directions for the defendants to provide further data and urged an expedited hearing, noting that the Pejovics might be planning to return to Croatia.
Judge Brian Cregan set a timetable for the submission of required details and adjourned the case for further review next month.
Investigations revealed that over three years, Ms. Pejovic allegedly generated 152 payments supposedly intended for suppliers or employees. These funds were reportedly funneled into two Revolut accounts in Lithuania, one in Ireland, and her Bank of Ireland account, were her salary was deposited.
The discrepancies came to light during Ms. Pejovic’s maternity leave,when a supplier was found unpaid despite records suggesting otherwise. A subsequent audit uncovered the suspicious payments. Additionally, it was alleged that Ms. Pejovic sent numerous emails containing sensitive company data,including payroll and procurement details,to her husband. Evidence also surfaced of a forged tenancy agreement for a Dubai property, naming Mr. Pejovic as the landlord.
This case continues to unfold, highlighting the complexities of corporate fraud and the legal challenges faced by both accusers and defendants in such high-stakes disputes.
Please give me the specific question you want me to answer. Such as:
On the couple’s assets following a case brought by Whitecamp Limited, wich runs the Mespil Hotel in Dublin 4. The hotel, through Whitecamp, has accused the couple of an “outright and intentional theft”. It claims that the Pejovic’s diverted customer payments into bank accounts that they controlled: a total of €397,000 in cash and another €200,000 in credit card payments.
Ms. Pejovic denies any wrongdoing. Her counterclaim is based on her alleged role in advising the hotel’s executive team on renovations of the Mespil Hotel and the opening of a new hotel. She claims that she entered into an agreement with the hotel’s owner, Paul Fitzgerald, and based on her professional expertise, is owed €1 million in unpaid fees. She also denies the alleged unauthorized bank accounts were set up by her, describing them as belonging to a separate business. She alleges that she is being scapegoated for the hotel’s financial failures. Ms. Pejovic further claims that the hotel’s directors had been aware of the accounts and authorized their use for customer payments.
Whitecamp and the Mespil Hotel deny that any consulting agreement ever existed and say Ms.Pejovic’s account is “entirely impractical”. The hotel has further accused the couple of having a “secret understanding” between them to divert funds, pointing to evidence that the accounts used for the alleged theft were opened in Mr.Pejovic’s name and controlled by him.
Mr. Pejovic, who is a Serbian national, denies any involvement in the alleged scheme, saying he was unaware of his wife’s business. Ms. Pejovic has said her husband was involved in real estate and had no connection to the hotel or its accounts.
The couple is currently facing freezing orders on their assets, including a property in Dublin and a Mercedes car. The case continues in the High Court.
Interview with Ms. Andja Gulic Pejovic: A Case of Scapegoating or misappropriation?
Introduction:
In a high-stakes legal battle, Andja Gulic Pejovic, a former accounts executive at Dublin’s Mespil Hotel, and her husband, Dusan Pejovic, are accused of misappropriating €597,000 from their employer. However, Ms. Pejovic has launched a counterclaim, alleging she is owed €1 million under a consulting agreement with the hotel. The High Court has issued freezing orders on the couple’s assets as the case unfolds. Today, we sit down with Ms. Pejovic to hear her side of the story.
Q1: Ms. Pejovic, thank you for joining us.The allegations against you and your husband are severe. How do you respond to the accusation that you misappropriated funds from the Mespil Hotel?
Ms. Pejovic: thank you for giving me the possibility to speak. These accusations are not only false but deeply damaging to my reputation. I have dedicated years of my career to the Mespil Hotel, and the idea that I would steal from my employer is outrageous. The funds in question were not misappropriated.They were part of a separate business arrangement, and the hotel’s directors were fully aware of the accounts and their use.This is a clear case of scapegoating, and I intend to prove my innocence.
Q2: you’ve counterclaimed that the hotel owes you €1 million for consulting services. Can you elaborate on this agreement and your role in the hotel’s operations?
Ms. Pejovic: Absolutely. I’m a professional with extensive experience in hospitality and finance. Along with my role as an accounts executive, I was engaged as a consultant by the hotel’s owner, Paul Fitzgerald. I advised the executive team on significant renovations at the Mespil Hotel and the opening of a new hotel. This was a separate, formal agreement, and I provided valuable expertise that contributed to the hotel’s operations. despite my contributions, I have not been compensated for this work, and I am seeking what is rightfully owed to me.
Q3: the hotel has denied the existence of this consulting agreement, calling your claims “entirely impossible.” How do you respond to this?
Ms. Pejovic: It’s disappointing but not surprising that the hotel would deny this. The consulting agreement was a verbal understanding with Mr. Fitzgerald, backed by emails and documentation that I have submitted to the court. I have maintained transparency throughout this process, and I believe the evidence will speak for itself. The hotel’s denial is an attempt to discredit me and distract from their own financial mismanagement.
Q4: The hotel has also accused you and your husband of having a “secret understanding” to divert funds, pointing to accounts opened in your husband’s name. What is your response?
Ms. Pejovic: My husband, Dusan, has no connection to the Mespil Hotel or its accounts. He is a real estate professional and was unaware of my consulting work. The accounts in question were not secret; they were part of a legitimate business arrangement. The hotel’s attempt to drag my husband into this is a baseless tactic to tarnish our reputations further. Dusan and I are innocent, and we will vigorously defend ourselves against these allegations.
Q5: The court has issued freezing orders on your assets, including a property in dublin and a Mercedes car. How has this affected you personally and professionally?
Ms. Pejovic: It has been incredibly challenging. These freezing orders have caused significant financial strain and emotional distress. However, I remain determined to clear my name and prove that these allegations are unfounded. I have always conducted myself with integrity, and I am confident that the truth will prevail.
Q6: What do you hope to achieve through this legal battle?
Ms. Pejovic: My goal is to clear my name, hold the Mespil hotel accountable for their actions, and receive the compensation I am owed. This case is about justice—not just for me but for anyone who has been wrongfully accused. I want to send a message that individuals cannot be scapegoated for an organization’s failures.
Q7: is there anything else you’d like to add?
Ms. Pejovic: I would like to thank my legal team and those who have supported me during this difficult time. I am determined to see this through and emerge stronger on the other side. I ask the public to reserve judgment until all the facts are presented in court.
Conclusion:
The legal battle between Andja Gulic Pejovic and the Mespil Hotel continues to unfold, with significant implications for both parties. As Ms. Pejovic maintains her innocence and fights to clear her name, the court will ultimately determine the truth behind these allegations. For now,she remains steadfast in her resolve to seek justice.
