Zach Leggett in his case comment, .Leggett Z. Court of Appeal: Theft: Appropriation through submitting false claims? Darroux v R [2018] EWCA Crim 1009. The Journal of Criminal Law. 2018;82(4):287-291, discusses the case of Darroux and the issue of appropriation of property.
Critically analyse the key arguments advanced by Leggett and justify and evidence your argument as to whether you agree or not with his conclusion that:
Ultimately, the decision in Darroux takes a narrow view of appropriation which sits uneasily with cases such as Gomez and Hinks….It seems that the Court of Appeal is minded to create a distinction between theft and fraud and is reluctant to use s. 1 of the Theft Act 1968 as a catch-all offence. If the suggestion from Catherine Elliott is that R v Williams closed off some of the problematic loopholes created in Preddy, then by taking a strict approach in the current case, the Court of Appeal is potentially opening them back up again.
