The appeals’ court overturned a judgment issued by the magistrates’ court, and jailed the director of a turnkey company for two years after it found him guilty of several charges of misappropriation.

Mr Zammit had been charged on 24 October 2006, with various charges of misappropriation and defrauding several people.

On 10 September 2007, the magistrates’ court declared Simon Zammit not guilty and cleared him of all charges of misappropriation. Following this judgment, the Attorney General filed an appeal.

Mr Justice Joseph Galea Debono, who presided over the appeal, noted that, on 17 September 2002, Mr Zammit had registered a company called Turnkey Company Ltd. After the placing of several adverts, he received a number of commissions from clients, who after signing a contract, paid a deposit.

These works were started, but never finished – or if they were finished, they were not to the clients’ satisfaction.

The court also noted that the Consumers Department had also received a number of complaints about Mr Zammit, and handed them over to the police.

In his testimony, Mr Zammit gave various reasons why the work had not started, or was not completed but also promised that he would pay everyone within a month. However, the court noted that this did not take place.

In the first judgment, the magistrates’ court ruled that Mr Zammit did not misappropriate the funds as he did not create a false company or “imaginary credit”, and none of the witnesses said that he swindled them. Instead, however, Mr Zammit started business with third parties which “and for some reason did not start working which, as a result, caused problems”.

However, in his judgment, Mr Justice Galea Debono said he did not agree with the magistrates’ court ruling and pointed out that Mr Zammit was using a uniform “system of conduct”.

Through this system, the court said, Mr Zammit was taking sums of money from various people under the pretext of starting works which, “for one false reason or another,” did not start or were not finished”.

However, the court said that “when it came to the crunch” and Mr Zammit was asked to return the deposits, he was unable to do so, even though, in a statement he released to the police over a year ago, he had promised to return the money.

Police inspector Ian J. Abdilla prosecuted.