LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CIVIL PROCEDURE – Appeals – Concurrent Findings of Fact – Appellate Court Will Not Disturb Unless Perverse or Unsupported
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
It is trite law that this court will not disturb concurrent findings of fact of both the trial court and the Court of Appeal unless a substantial error apparent on the face of the record of proceedings is shown or when such findings are perverse or not supported by evidence or reached as a result of a wrong approach to the evidence or a wrong application of a principle of law or procedure.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Iguh, JSC, in Ojengbede v. Esan & Anor (2001) NLC-321991(SC) at p. 17; Paras A–C.
"It is trite law that this court will not disturb concurrent findings of fact of both the trial court and the Court of Appeal unless a substantial error apparent on the face of the record of proceedings is shown or when such findings are perverse or not supported by evidence or reached as a result of a wrong approach to the evidence or a wrong application of a principle of law or procedure."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
The Supreme Court will not disturb concurrent findings of fact by the trial court and Court of Appeal unless: (1) substantial error apparent on the record; (2) findings are perverse; (3) findings not supported by evidence; (4) wrong approach to evidence; or (5) wrong application of law or procedure. The appellant bears the burden of demonstrating these grounds. Mere disagreement is insufficient. Concurrent findings carry great weight. The policy promotes finality and respects lower courts’ fact-finding roles. Interference is exceptional. The court examines whether the findings are reasonably supported by evidence. The principle applies to both civil and criminal appeals. The appellant must show manifest error or miscarriage of justice.
