Inge v The Queen

Inge v The Queen concerned an appeal to the High Court of Australia following a conviction for murder. The appellant, Inge, had been found guilty of murder by a jury in the Supreme Court of New South Wales and subsequently appealed to the Court of Criminal Appeal of New South Wales, which dismissed his appeal. The High Court then granted special leave to appeal.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the trial judge had erred in law by failing to direct the jury adequately on the issue of provocation as a defence to murder. Specifically, the court considered whether the judge's summing up had sufficiently explained the objective element of provocation, namely whether the provocation was such as to cause an ordinary person to lose self-control.

The High Court held that the trial judge's directions on provocation were inadequate. Gleeson CJ, Gummow and Hayne JJ reasoned that the jury must be instructed that the question of whether the provocation was sufficient to cause an ordinary person to lose self-control is a question of fact for the jury to determine, and that the judge's summing up had not made this sufficiently clear. The court emphasised that the jury must consider the effect of the provocation on an ordinary person, not merely the effect it had on the particular accused.

Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal, quashed the conviction for murder, and remitted the matter to the Supreme Court of New South Wales for a retrial.