APPELLATE PRACTICE — Concurrent Findings — Interference by Supreme Court — When Justified
Ratio Decidendi
Per Tabai, JSC, in Okonkwo & Ors v. Okonkwo & Ors (2010) NLC-123-296-2003(SC) at p. 6, paras. D–E:
"The evaluation of evidence is pre-eminently the duty of the trial court which alone has the singular benefit of seeing and hearing witnesses. An appellate court which does not enjoy this singular opportunity of seeing and hearing witness would not therefore ordinarily interfere with findings of facts of the trial court. An appellate court will therefore only interfere with findings of fact of the trial court if it is established that the findings are not supported by the totality of evidence on record."
Explanation / Scope
This principle establishes that appellate courts will not interfere with trial court findings unless they are not supported by the totality of evidence. The principle applies where findings of fact are challenged. It ensures that the trial court’s advantage 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 appellate courts will interfere with findings of fact.