Killick v The Queen

In *Killick v The Queen*, the High Court of Australia considered an appeal from a conviction for murder. The appellant, Killick, had been found guilty of murder by a jury in the Supreme Court of Queensland and sentenced to life imprisonment. The appeal to the High Court concerned the trial judge's directions to the jury regarding the defence of provocation.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the trial judge had adequately directed the jury on the elements of provocation, particularly in relation to the subjective and objective aspects of the defence. Specifically, the court had to determine if the jury had been properly instructed on how to assess whether the provocation was such as to cause an ordinary person to lose self-control and whether the appellant had, in fact, lost self-control.

The High Court, in allowing the appeal and quashing the conviction, held that the trial judge's summing up had been insufficient. Gibbs C.J. and Wilson J. (with whom Brennan J. agreed) found that the directions failed to clearly articulate the two-stage test for provocation. They emphasised that the jury must first consider whether the provocation was capable of causing an ordinary person to lose self-control, and then, if so, whether the particular accused did in fact lose self-control. Murphy and Aickin JJ. dissented, finding the summing up to be adequate in the circumstances.

The High Court ordered that the conviction for murder be quashed and remitted the matter to the Supreme Court of Queensland for a new trial on the charge of murder.