Clothier v The Queen

In *Clothier v The Queen*, the appellant, Clothier, was convicted of murder in the Supreme Court of New South Wales. The Crown alleged that Clothier had intentionally caused the death of the deceased. Clothier appealed his conviction to 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 adequately direct the jury on the defence of provocation. Specifically, the question was whether the jury should have been instructed that if they found the deceased's conduct to have been a contributing cause to Clothier's loss of self-control, this could be sufficient to establish provocation, even if the deceased's conduct was not the sole cause.

The High Court, comprising Gleeson CJ and McHugh J, considered the principles of provocation as a defence to murder. Their Honours noted that provocation requires an act or series of acts on the part of the deceased which caused the accused to lose self-control and, in the heat of passion, to kill the deceased. The Court held that the jury directions were inadequate because they did not sufficiently explain that the deceased's conduct need only be a *contributing* cause to the loss of self-control, rather than the sole cause. The jury should have been directed that if they were satisfied that the deceased's conduct played a part in causing the appellant to lose self-control, and that this loss of self-control led to the killing, then the defence of provocation might be made out.

The High Court allowed the appeal, quashed the conviction for murder, and ordered a new trial.