APPELLATE PRACTICE — Findings of Fact — Interference by Appellate Court — Misdirection as Exception
Ratio Decidendi
Per Akintan, JSC, in Garuba v. Yahaya (2007) NLC-123-84-1999(SC) at p. 6; Paras A–C:
"The law is settled that an appellate court should not ordinarily disturb or tamper with the findings of facts made by a trial court, particularly if such findings and conclusions reached are supported by credible evidence. This principle is premised on the fact that the duty of appraising of evidence given at a trial is pre-eminently that of the trial court that saw and heard the witnesses... But an exception to the above rule is where there is misdirection by the trial court. Misdirection occurs when the issues of fact in the case for the parties or the law applicable to the issues raised are not fairly appraised, or considered or misconceived or the law applicable is incorrectly applied by the trial court as a result, there would be a miscarriage of justice if the decision erroneously reached is allowed to stand."
Explanation / Scope
Appellate courts generally defer to trial court findings of fact due to the trial court’s advantage of seeing and hearing witnesses. However, an exception exists where there is misdirection—where the trial court fails to properly appraise the issues, misconceives the law, or incorrectly applies the law. Such misdirection can lead to a miscarriage of justice and justifies appellate intervention.