Melbourne v The Queen

Melbourne (the appellant) was convicted of murder in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The appellant appealed to the High Court of Australia against this conviction.

The High Court was required to determine whether the trial judge had erred in law by failing to direct the jury on the defence of provocation, and if so, whether the conviction should be quashed and a new trial ordered.

McHugh and Callinan JJ, in a joint judgment, held that the evidence presented at trial, including the appellant's own testimony, was capable of supporting a finding of provocation. They reasoned that the jury should have been given the opportunity to consider whether the appellant's actions were a response to a sudden or unexpected provocation, which would have reduced the charge from murder to manslaughter. The legal principle applied was that where there is evidence, however slight, that could support a defence, the judge must direct the jury on that defence.

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