LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE – Concurrent findings of fact – Attitude of the Supreme Court to interference
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The Supreme Court will not disturb concurrent findings of fact by lower courts where such findings are supported by sufficient evidence. Interference is only warranted where there is substantial error or the findings are perverse.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Ogundare, JSC, in Oladele v. Anibi (1998) NLC-3021991(SC) at p. 7; Paras A–B.
"This court will not disturb concurrent findings of fact by the lower courts where such findings are supported by sufficient evidence... This court will only interfere with such findings where there is any substantial error apparent on the record of proceedings or where it is shown that the findings are perverse."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Concurrent findings supported by evidence are binding. Interference requires substantial error or perversity. The principle applies to all appeals. The appellant bears a heavy burden. The rule promotes finality and efficiency. The Supreme Court will not re-evaluate evidence. The principle is well-established.