LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE — Concurrent Findings — Interference by Appellate Court
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
An appellate court will not ordinarily interfere with findings of fact of a trial court which are supported by evidence unless such findings are perverse or clearly wrong.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Iguh, JSC, in Faleye v. Otapo (1995) NLC-31993(SC) at p. 36; Paras. A–C.
"An appellate court will not ordinarily interfere with the findings of fact of a trial court which are supported by evidence unless such findings are perverse or clearly wrong. The findings of the learned trial Judge in this case were supported by credible evidence and were neither perverse nor clearly wrong. The Court of Appeal was in error when it reversed those findings without any solid justification."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Appellate courts defer to trial court findings on fact. Interference requires perversity or clear error. The principle respects the trial court’s advantage. The appellate court will not re-evaluate evidence. The rule promotes finality and judicial efficiency. The appellant must show clear error. The court will examine whether the findings are supported by evidence.