The words 'based on' in s 304(3)(c) of the Criminal Code (Qld) do not confine the domestic relationship exclusion to cases where the nominated provocative act is itself a thing done to change the relationship. The exclusion may be engaged where a thing done by the deceased to change the relationship precedes the nominated provocative act and is the foundation of what followed, provided there is a substantial causal connection. A defendant cannot avoid s 304(3) simply by nominating the most immediate act of the deceased as the provocative conduct. However, the question remains one of fact for the jury in each case, and a mere connection or contextual relationship is insufficient. The dissent (McMurdo JA) would have required the specific act causing loss of self-control to itself be an act done to change the relationship.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.
1 of the 1 citing case carries a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.