APPELLATE PRACTICE — Concurrent Findings of Fact — When Appellate Court May Interfere
Ratio Decidendi
Per Fabiyi, JSC, in Jolasun v. Bamgboye (2010) NLC-123-8-2002(SC) at p. 16, paras. D–F:
"Generally, an appellate court will not interfere unless compelling reasons are shown which justify interference... There was no compelling reason shown to justify interference by the court below as it did. The concurrent findings by the Registrar of Titles and the High Court on appeal did not run against the current of evidence as garnered."
Explanation / Scope
This principle establishes that an appellate court will not interfere with concurrent findings of fact unless compelling reasons are shown to justify interference. The principle applies where concurrent findings are challenged. It ensures that findings are 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 appellate courts will interfere with concurrent findings.