Rossi v The Queen

The case of Rossi v The Queen concerned an appeal to the High Court of Australia following a conviction for murder. The appellant, Rossi, had been found guilty of murder by a jury in the Supreme Court of Victoria and subsequently appealed to the Court of Appeal of Victoria, which dismissed his appeal. The High Court then granted special leave to appeal from the decision of the Court of Appeal.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the trial judge had erred in law by failing to direct the jury on the defence of provocation. Specifically, the court had to consider whether there was sufficient evidence of provocation to warrant such a direction, and if not, whether the absence of such a direction had led to a miscarriage of justice.

Kiefel and Keane JJ found that the evidence presented at trial did not support a finding of provocation. Their Honours reasoned that the defence of provocation requires evidence that the act causing death was done in the heat of passion caused by a sudden provocation, and that the provocation was such as to make an ordinary person act as the accused did. In this instance, the conduct relied upon by the appellant as provocation was not sufficiently immediate or severe to meet this threshold, and therefore, the trial judge was not obliged to leave the defence to the jury. The High Court concluded that there was no error in the trial judge's charge and dismissed the appeal.