Provocation—does Paria Add Anything Useful?

Abstract

There has been much controversy in recent years relating to aspects of the partial defence of provocation. A particular issue has centred on whether, and in what circumstances, the defendant's characteristics can be taken into account with regard to his ability to exercise self-control. In the recent case of Paria v The State, an appeal originating from Trinidad and Tobago, the Privy Council was invited to apply the decision of the House of Lords in R v Smith (Morgan). In the event, the Privy Council declined to do so, but nonetheless made some observations on that case. This article considers the more fundamental question of whether the Privy Council should have been considering Smith at all, and argues that, for precedent-based reasons, it should not. It draws on criticisms made by other commentators to the effect that observations made by the Privy Council in Paria about Smith are not soundly based, and concludes that the case adds little of value to the law in either England and Wales or Trinidad and Tobago.