APPELLATE PRACTICE — Concurrent Findings of Fact — Interference by Supreme Court — Conditions for Interference
Ratio Decidendi
Per Mukhtar, JSC, in Amasike v. Registrar General, CAC & Anor (2010) NLC-2042005(SC) at p. 23; Paras A–B:
"The law is trite that such concurrent findings of fact by two lower courts will not ordinarily be interfered with by this court, unless the findings are perverse, not supported by credible evidence, and they resulted in miscarriage of justice or violation of some principles of procedural and substantive law."
Explanation / Scope
This principle establishes the conditions for interfering with concurrent findings of fact. The Supreme Court will not interfere unless findings are perverse, unsupported by credible evidence, or resulted in miscarriage of justice or violation of law. The principle applies where concurrent findings are challenged. It ensures that finality is respected. The principle reflects the limited scope of appellate review. It prevents unnecessary interference. The court must find an exception. The principle provides guidance on when interference is justified.