A turnkey contractor, who had been paid some €19,000 for a project at a Sliema residence which he failed to complete, was cleared of misappropriation since the criminal action was time-barred.

Amad Aluwyad Nabil Mahmoud, 44, had signed a contract for €30,000 for turnkey services at the residence of a woman against a €7,500 deposit paid in cash upon conclusion of the agreement.

Ten days later, when the works had already kicked off, the contractor had requested a further payment of €9,000, claiming that he needed the funds to purchase materials.

However, his workmen had allegedly told her that they had not been paid their wages.

A couple of days after the second payment, the man had turned up at the woman’s house, towards midnight, kicking up a fuss, shouting and demanding a further €2,500, threatening to quit the job unless she handed over the money, which, in fact, she did, the woman explained later in court

However, some time later, the man had simply vanished into thin air, with the woman turning towards his lawyer and alleging that he was aware of the fraud committed by his client.

After a lapse of one year or so, the contractor eventually turned up once again, claiming to have left the island after running into financial problems, even being targeted by proceedings for sale by auction.

Criminal proceedings for misappropriation were instituted against him, during which his lawyer, Dr Roberto Montalto, had taken the witness stand after being duly released from professional secrecy, explaining how he had personally suggested to the alleged victim to take her grievance to the police.

The lawyer also pointed out that the woman had never reported the alleged threats by his client, had never put forward any valuations of the works done and those left unfinished, and had not sought a remedy by means of any civil action.

After being declared guilty and conditionally discharged for three years in 2016, the accused’s case was sent back to the Magistrates’ Court upon appeal on account of the fact that the prosecution had never concluded its evidence stage.

When the case was assigned anew, the court, presided over by magistrate Caroline Farrugia Frendo, observed that there was no evidence whatsoever of the value of the works carried out before the accused abandoned the project.

Moreover, although the case dated back to 2009, the man had first appeared in court in 2015, the court observed, concluding that the action was time-barred given that the prescriptive period was that of five years.

Lawyer Roberto Montalto was defence counsel.