Te v The Queen

The case of *Te v The Queen* concerned an appeal to the High Court of Australia following a conviction for murder. The appellant, Mr. Te, 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 adequately on the defence of provocation. Specifically, the question was whether the judge's summing up had sufficiently explained the objective element of provocation, namely whether a person of the appellant's age and characteristics, with the appellant's ordinary self-control, might have reacted to the deceased's conduct in the way the appellant did.

The High Court, in a joint judgment delivered by Gummow, Kirby and Hayne JJ, held that the trial judge's directions on provocation were inadequate. Their Honours explained that the defence of provocation requires the jury to consider not only the subjective element (that the act was done in the heat of passion caused by a sudden and temporary loss of self-control) but also the objective element. This objective element requires the jury to determine whether the provocation was such as to cause an ordinary person, sharing the characteristics of the accused, to lose self-control and react in the manner of the accused. The Court found that the summing up had not adequately conveyed this objective standard to the jury, leaving open the possibility that the jury had applied an incorrect test.

Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal, quashed the conviction for murder, and ordered a new trial.