LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE – Retrial – Principles Governing Order for Retrial – Failure of Trial Judge to Evaluate Evidence and Resolve Conflicts
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
When a judge who, guided by the pleadings, has heard evidence in a case but has in his judgment failed to give a fair summary of the cases presented by the parties and to summarise the evidence and make findings of fact on the various material issues raised in the pleadings, he cannot be seen to have discharged his judicial function properly. The requirement that a judgment must clearly demonstrate that the conclusions arrived at in the case were not based on intuition and whim of the judge but on evidence, properly evaluated, and the law is not an insistence on mere form, but derives from the need to ensure and demonstrate that substantial justice has been done in the case.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Ayoola, JSC, in Sagay v. Sajere & Anor (2000) NLC-801994(SC) at pp. 6–7; Paras D–E.
"When a judge who, guided by the pleadings, has heard evidence in a case but has in his judgment failed to give a fair summary of the cases presented by the parties and to summarise the evidence and make findings of fact on the various material issues raised in the pleadings, he cannot be seen to have discharged his judicial function properly. The requirement that a judgment must clearly demonstrate that the conclusions arrived at in the case were not based on intuition and whim of the judge but on evidence, properly evaluated, and the law is not an insistence on mere form, but derives from the need to ensure and demonstrate that substantial justice has been done in the case."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
A trial judge must properly evaluate evidence and resolve material issues. Failure to summarize cases, evaluate evidence, or make findings on pleaded issues constitutes dereliction of judicial duty. A judgment must demonstrate that conclusions rest on evidence and law, not intuition. This requirement ensures substantial justice, not mere form. Where the trial judge fails in this duty, the appellate court may order a retrial to allow proper adjudication. The defect cannot be cured by the appellate court re-evaluating evidence, especially where credibility is in issue.