tHE family of a murder victim is suing a supermarket giant for £500,000 after he was stabbed to death by a work colleague.

Relatives of Roman Romasov claim their loss and injury was caused by Sainsbury's vicarious liability for the actions of its then employee, killer Robert McCulloch, under protection from harassment legislation.

They maintain McCulloch was a British National Party member who was known to hold "extreme and racist views about Eastern Europeans coming to the UK".

McCulloch, 37, was jailed for life in 2009 after repeatedly stabbing his Lithuanian victim in an aisle at Sainsbury's store in Aberdeen's Berryden Road with a knife he took from the kitchenware section.

The nightshift worker was ordered to serve at least 10 years and nine months in jail before he can apply for parole after admitting the murder of shelf-stacker Mr Romasov, 28.

Mr Romasov's mother Jelena Vaickuviene, 54, stepfather Edmundus Vaickus, 54, and brother Martynus, of Klaipeda, Lithuania, are seeking compensation from Sainsbury's at the Court of Session in Edinburgh. The mother and the brother are each suing for £200,000 and the step-father for £100,000.

In the action they said Mr Romasov, of Aberdeen, was working at the store to fund his studies in mechanical engineering at college in Aberdeen.

He had previously pitched a tent outside the headquarters of an oil firm and pleaded for work.

The family said McCulloch, of Aberdeen, was one of several nightshift staff he regularly worked alongside.

They maintain McCulloch "had frequently made racist comments and was aggressive and argumentative" and that there had been "bad blood" between them.

It is claimed that, days before the attack, members of staff heard McCulloch threaten to kill the deceased.

The family maintain a distressed Mr Romasov wrote to his line manager to complain about the racist comments made by McCulloch but, by the time of his death, no action had been taken.

The relatives said: "The making of racist comments, with or without the aggression manifested by McCulloch, was a disciplinary offence in terms of the defenders' policies and would have resulted in disciplinary action, including the risk of dismissal. McCulloch was aware of the fact the deceased had complained about him and of the potential repercussions."

But the family said there was no action in the intervening days to warn, suspend or dismiss McCulloch or to ensure the two men were not on shift together.

On the night of the attack, in April 2009, there was an earlier argument and confrontation between the men. McCulloch was later seen pacing up and down and talking to himself.

He then took the knife and inflicted multiple stab wounds on his victim. Paramedics tried to revive Mr Romasov who survived for some time after the attack, but were unsuccessful.

The family maintain the conduct of McCulloch towards the victim amounted to harassment in terms of the Protection from Harassment Act 1997.

Sainsbury's is contesting the claim, maintaining the actions of McCulloch were not related to either its business or his job duties.

It said: "There was no connection between those actings and McCulloch's employment."

The supermarket chain said it does not know and does not admit that McCulloch was a member of the BNP, nor that he was aware the deceased had complained about him.

It says the murder of a person does not fall within the definition of harassment under the legislation.

The firm is seeking to have the action dismissed at a procedural hearing before Lady Clark of Calton.