Nixon v The Queen

The High Court of Australia heard an appeal in *Nixon v The Queen*. The appellant, Nixon, had been convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. The appeal concerned the interpretation and application of the *Criminal Code* (Cth) in relation to the defence of provocation.

The central legal issue before the Court was whether the defence of provocation, as codified in section 304 of the *Criminal Code* (Cth), required the jury to find that the provocation was such as to make an ordinary person lose self-control, or whether it was sufficient that the accused, in fact, lost self-control due to the provocation. The Court also considered whether the trial judge had adequately directed the jury on the elements of the defence.

The Court analysed the wording of section 304, which requires that the provocation be "such as to make an ordinary person... lose the power of self-control". Their Honours held that this wording imposed an objective standard, meaning the jury must consider whether an ordinary person, in the circumstances of the accused, would have reacted with loss of self-control. It was not enough for the accused to have subjectively lost control; the provocation must have been of a kind that could reasonably be expected to cause an ordinary person to do so. The Court found that the trial judge's directions had failed to adequately convey this objective element of the defence to the jury.

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