Alister v the Queen

Alister appealed his conviction for murder in the Supreme Court of Queensland. The appeal was heard by the High Court of Australia.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the trial judge had erred in law by failing to direct the jury on the defence of provocation, despite the defence not having been specifically raised by the appellant. The court also considered the proper test for determining whether a defence, even if not explicitly pleaded, should be left for the jury's consideration.

The High Court held that a judge is obliged to direct a jury on a defence if there is any evidence, however tenuous, upon which a jury might find that the elements of the defence are made out. This obligation arises even if the defence has not been specifically raised by the accused. The court reasoned that the right to a fair trial includes the right to have all relevant defences considered by the jury, and that the onus is on the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, which includes disproving any defence that is open on the evidence. The court found that there was sufficient evidence of provocation in the trial proceedings to warrant a direction to the jury.

The appeal was allowed, the conviction was quashed, and a new trial was ordered.