When directing a jury on provocation, the trial judge must clearly and separately explain that the accused's personal characteristics are to be taken into account in assessing the gravity of the provocation as a preliminary to the objective test, and not merely for the subjective test. An aide memoire that conflates the two tests or fails to make this distinction clear is likely to mislead the jury and result in a miscarriage of justice. The consideration of the accused's personal characteristics in assessing the gravity of provocation is mandatory, not merely permissive. The question whether psychological maturity (as opposed to chronological age) is a permissible characteristic of the ordinary person for the objective test was left open.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 6 later cases that cite this judgment.