LEGAL PRINCIPLE: EVIDENCE LAW — Evaluation of Evidence — Primary Function of Trial Court Not to Be Disturbed on Appeal Absent Improper Evaluation
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
Evaluation of evidence is primarily the function of the trial Judge. Interference by an appellate court occurs only where the trial court fails to evaluate such evidence at all or fails to do so properly. Where the trial court has satisfactorily performed its primary function, an appellate court has no business interfering.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Akintan, JSC, in Mainagge v. Gwamma (2004) NLC-191998(SC) at p. 12; Paras A–B.
"The law is settled that evaluation of evidence is primarily the function of the trial Judge. Interference by an appellate court could only occur where and when he fails to evaluate such evidence at all or he fails to do so properly. Where, therefore, the trial court has satisfactorily performed its primary function of evaluating the evidence and correctly ascribing probative value to it, an appellate court has no business interfering with its finding on such evidence."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Trial courts have the primary function of evaluating evidence and ascribing probative value. Appellate courts only interfere where the trial court fails to evaluate at all or does so improperly. The principle applies to appellate practice. The rule respects the trial court’s advantage of seeing and hearing witnesses. Properly performed evaluation binds the appellate court. The appellate court will not substitute its own views.
