Man must not contact woman he harassed

A man in his 60s has agreed to keep away from a 27-year-old receptionist who claims he physically, emotionally, and sexually harassed her.

Yesterday at the High Court, Derek Collins gave a sworn undertaking before Mr Justice Kevin Cross that he would not come within 500m of Renata Kaminska, her place of residence, or her place of work. He also agreed not to communicate with her by telephone, social media, email, or through a third party.

Ms Kaminska had previously got a temporary injunction from the court restraining Collins, of Furry Hill, Sandyford, Dublin, from coming near or contacting her.

She sought the orders because she claimed Collins had harassed her for about six months and on one occasion threatened to kill her. She further claimed she was assaulted by him on several occasions.

The High Court heard she works for a firm at North Wall Quay, Dublin. Collins was also based at the same premises, where he was employed by a different company.

The court heard that Ms Kaminska’s allegations against Collins included that he had told her he loved her, and had been “waiting for me for 30 years”.

She claimed Collins had on one occasion told her he had her followed after she left a restaurant “to see where I was going”.

She also claimed that on another occasion he backed her into a place at work that was not in the view of CCTV, grabbed her, and hugged and kissed her.

He once invited her to lunch. However, she said she was uncomfortable with this and brought her partner with her. She said that afterwards Collins got upset with her and called her a liar for bringing her partner as he “just wanted it to be the two of us”.

After she made an official complaint he was suspended from his job. While Collins was suspended she said she received a large number of missed calls to her phone. She also claimed he sent her texts saying that “he would not hurt her”. Some weeks later she received a telephone call from him where he “threatened to kill me”.

Yesterday, Collins told the court he was now unemployed and “had nothing” as a result of what had happened, but did not accept counsel’s assertion that he was the author of his own misfortune.

The judge also awarded costs of the proceedings in favour of Ms Kaminska.