LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE — Concurrent Findings of Fact — Interference by Supreme Court — When Justified
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
There are concurrent findings of fact in the decisions of both the trial court and the Court of Appeal. The Supreme Court will not interfere unless the findings are perverse or not supported by evidence.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Kalgo, JSC, in Iso & Ors v. Eno (2003) NLC-1701999(SC) at p. 9; Paras A–B.
"There are concurrent findings of fact in the decisions of both the trial court and the Court of Appeal in this matter. The appellants were not successful in both courts, and in this court, they have not shown any special circumstance why this court should interfere especially in this case where the findings are reasonably justified and supported by evidence."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Concurrent findings are binding on the Supreme Court. Interference requires perversity or lack of evidence. The principle applies to all appeals. The appellant bears a heavy burden. The rule promotes finality. The principle is well-established.