In R v MEB [2024] QCA 188, the appellant MEB challenged both his conviction and sentence for assault occasioning bodily harm in a domestic violence context. The appeal stemmed from a District Court decision where MEB was found guilty on count two, although acquitted on two other counts. MEB argued the trial judge erred by not instructing the jury on the defense of provocation, despite conflicting evidence regarding the events between MEB and the complainant. The complainant claimed MEB punched her, resulting in a laceration, while MEB alleged he was attacked and did not retaliate. The Court of Appeal, considering these aspects and the trial proceedings, decided to allow the appeal concerning count two due to potential miscarriage of justice, ordering a new trial on that count. The Court, led by Justices Bond, Brown, and Kelly, found that the omission to address potential provocation warranted reconsideration and highlighted the significance of clear jury instructions in complex domestic violence cases.
top of page
bottom of page