LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE – Concurrent Findings – Supreme Court Will Not Interfere Unless Manifestly Erroneous
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
I see no reason to interfere with the concurrent findings by the two courts below. The appeal lacks merit and I hereby dismiss it.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Wali, JSC, in Ubani v. State (2001) NLC-2072000(SC) at p. 1; Paras E–A.
"I see no reason to interfere with the concurrent findings by the two courts below. The appeal lacks merit and I hereby dismiss it."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
The Supreme Court will not interfere with concurrent findings of fact by two lower courts unless the findings are manifestly erroneous or perverse. The appellant must demonstrate clear error or miscarriage of justice. Mere disagreement is insufficient. The principle respects the fact-finding roles of lower courts and promotes finality. The burden on the appellant is heavy. The court will not re-evaluate evidence simply because it might have reached a different conclusion. Interference is exceptional, not routine. The statement “I see no reason to interfere” reflects the default position. The appellant must provide cogent reasons. The concurrent findings are presumed correct. The appeal will be dismissed if no error is shown.
