LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE – Concurrent Findings of Fact – When Supreme Court Will Interfere
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The Supreme Court will not overrule the decision of the court below on a question of fact where the judge had the advantage of seeing witnesses and observing their demeanour, unless there is a governing fact that has created a wrong impression.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Ogwuegbu, JSC, in U.A.C. of Nigeria Ltd v. Fasheyitan (1998) NLC-2441990(SC) at p. 10; Paras D--E to p. 11; Para A.
"This court will not depart from the rule it has laid down that it will not overrule the decision of the court below on a question of fact in which the judge has had the advantage of seeing the witnesses and observing their demeanour, unless they find some governing fact which in relation to others has created a wrong impression."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Trial court’s factual findings are entitled to deference. Interference is allowed only if a governing fact created a wrong impression. The principle applies to all appeals. The appellant bears a heavy burden. The rule promotes finality. The principle is well-established.