LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE — Concurrent Findings of Fact — When Appellate Court Will Not Interfere
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The Supreme Court will not interfere with concurrent findings of fact by the two lower courts where they are not perverse or erroneous in substantive or procedural law.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Onu, JSC, in Amusa v. State (2003) NLC-3362001(SC) at pp. 8–9; Paras E–A.
"The decisions of the two courts below being concurrent findings of facts, I decline to interfere with them - both not being perverse or erroneous in substantive or procedural law."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Concurrent findings are binding on the Supreme Court. Interference requires perversity or error of law. The principle applies to all appeals. The appellant bears a heavy burden. The rule promotes finality. The Supreme Court will not re-evaluate evidence. The principle is well-established.