APPELLATE PRACTICE — Concurrent Findings — Interference by Appellate Court — When Findings Not Supported by Credible Evidence
Ratio Decidendi
Per Mukhtar, JSC, in Ajagbe v. Idowu (2011) NLC-123-271-2003(SC) at pp. 19—20; Paras E—A:
"It is also a cardinal principle of law that even though an appellate court will not ordinarily interfere with findings of a lower court, it behoves an appellate court to interfere with the findings where they are not supported by credible evidence, are perverse and may have occasioned miscarriage of justice."
Explanation / Scope
This principle establishes that although an appellate court will not ordinarily interfere with findings of a lower court, it must interfere where findings are unsupported by credible evidence, perverse, or have occasioned a miscarriage of justice. The principle applies where findings are challenged. It ensures that unsupported findings are corrected. The principle reflects the exceptions to the non-interference rule. It prevents injustice from perverse findings. The court must interfere where necessary. The principle provides guidance on interfering with findings not supported by evidence.