LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE — Concurrent Findings — Interference by Supreme Court — Principles
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The Supreme Court will not normally interfere with concurrent findings of the two lower courts unless there is a miscarriage of justice or a violation of some principles of law or procedure.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Iguh, JSC, in Ikpo v. The State (1995) NLC-1321994(SC) at p. 13; Paras. A–B.
"This court will not normally interfere with the concurrent findings of the two lower courts unless, of course, there is some miscarriage of justice or a violation of some principles of law or procedure."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Concurrent findings of fact by two lower courts are binding on the Supreme Court. Interference requires miscarriage of justice or violation of law. The appellant bears a heavy burden. The principle respects the fact-finding roles of lower courts. The Supreme Court will not re-evaluate evidence. Interference is reserved for exceptional cases. The rule promotes finality and judicial efficiency. The appellant must show clear error. The court will examine whether the findings are supported by evidence. The principle applies to both civil and criminal appeals.