LEGAL PRINCIPLE: EVIDENCE LAW — Evaluation of Evidence — Primary Duty of Trial Court — Appellate Intervention
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The evaluation of evidence is the primary responsibility of the trial court. An appellate court will interfere only if the finding is not supported by evidence, is perverse, or resulted from a wrong approach or application of law.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Musdapher, JSC, in Osolu & Ors v. Osolu & Ors (2003) NLC-571998(SC) at pp. 17–18; Paras D–A.
"The evaluation of evidence is the primary responsibility of the trial court, and an appellate court will only interfere with a finding of fact made by a trial Judge where such finding is not supported by evidence led before the trial Judge. Where a trial court makes a finding of fact and there is sufficient evidence in support thereof, then unless these findings are found to be perverse or are not supported by evidence or were reached as a result of a wrong approach to the evidence or as a result of a wrong application of a principle of substantive law or procedure, an appellate court even if disposed to come to a different conclusion upon the printed evidence cannot reverse the finding."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Appellate courts defer to trial court factual findings. Interference requires error or perversity. The principle applies to all appeals. The trial court’s findings are binding if supported by evidence. The rule promotes finality. The appellant must show manifest error. The principle is well-established.