APPELLATE PRACTICE — Concurrent Findings of Fact — When Appellate Court Will Interfere
Principle Statement
This is an appeal on concurrent findings of facts which the law does not permit an appeal court to interfere with unless the findings are not supported by credible evidence are perverse and have led to miscarriage of justice. In the instant case, the findings are supported by credible evidence and they cannot be faulted; and there is no palpable error in them. This court cannot and will not therefore disturb them.
Ratio Decidendi (Source)
Per Mukhtar, JSC, in Agala & Ors v. Okunsin & Ors (2010) NLC-123-25-2003(SC) at p. 16; Paras B–D.
"This is an appeal on concurrent findings of facts which the law does not permit an appeal court to interfere with unless the findings are not supported by credible evidence are perverse and have led to miscarriage of justice. In the instant case, the findings are supported by credible evidence and they cannot be faulted; and there is no palpable error in them. This court cannot and will not therefore disturb them."
Explanation / Scope
This principle establishes that appellate courts will not interfere with concurrent findings unless unsupported by evidence, perverse, or leading to miscarriage of justice. 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.
