APPELLATE PRACTICE ā Concurrent Findings of Fact ā Supreme Court Interference ā When Permissible
Principle Statement
The general inhibition of this Court from interfering with concurrent findings of fact by the two lower courts is now firmly settled. Unless the findings are not supported by credible and reliable evidence, and have led to miscarriage of justice an appellate court will not interfere with the judgment.
Ratio Decidendi (Source)
Per MUKHTAR, J.S.C., in Nkebisi & Anor v. State (2010) NLC-123-395-2002(SC) at p. 8; Paras DāE.
"The general inhibition of this Court from interfering with concurrent findings of fact by the two lower courts is now firmly settled. Unless the findings are not supported by credible and reliable evidence, and have led to miscarriage of justice an appellate court will not interfere with the judgment."
Explanation / Scope
This principle establishes that the Supreme Court will not interfere with concurrent findings unless they are unsupported by credible evidence and have led to a miscarriage of justice. The principle applies where both lower courts agree on factual findings. It promotes finality and respect for trial courts. The principle reflects the limited scope of appellate review. It prevents unnecessary interference. The appellant must demonstrate lack of support and miscarriage. The principle provides guidance on when interference is permissible.
