The Crown appealed a manslaughter verdict arising from a homicide prosecution where the trial judge instructed the jury that intense anger might reduce murder to manslaughter by negating intent.
The Court held that anger is not a stand-alone defence and may reduce murder to manslaughter only through the statutory defence of provocation when all required elements are established.
The impugned charge improperly suggested that anger short of provocation could negate the mens rea for murder.
The subsequent recharge on provocation did not cure that error.
A new trial on second degree murder was ordered.
