LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE – Grounds of Appeal – Omnibus Ground – Meaning and Scope
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
This, generally speaking, is said to imply that the judgment of the trial court cannot be supported by the weight of the evidence adduced by the successful party which the trial court either wrongly accepted or that the inference drawn or conclusion reached by the trial court based on the accepted evidence cannot be justified. Additionally, it covers cases where there is no or acceptable evidence to support the findings of the trial court. It also concerns situations in which when the evidence adduced by the appellant is weighed on the imaginary scale against that adduced by the respondent, the evidence in favour of the appellant, qualitatively speaking, outweighs that adduced on behalf of the respondent to the extent that the judgment given in favour of the respondent can be said to be against the totality of the evidence adduced before the trial court.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Iguh, JSC, in Sha (Jnr) & Anor v. Da Rap Kwan & Ors (2000) NLC-1401994(SC) at p. 11; Paras A–C.
"This, generally speaking, is said to imply that the judgment of the trial court cannot be supported by the weight of the evidence adduced by the successful party which the trial court either wrongly accepted or that the inference drawn or conclusion reached by the trial court based on the accepted evidence cannot be justified. Additionally, it covers cases where there is no or acceptable evidence to support the findings of the trial court. It also concerns situations in which when the evidence adduced by the appellant is weighed on the imaginary scale against that adduced by the respondent, the evidence in favour of the appellant, qualitatively speaking, outweighs that adduced on behalf of the respondent to the extent that the judgment given in favour of the respondent can be said to be against the totality of the evidence adduced before the trial court."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
An omnibus ground challenges the trial court’s evaluation of evidence—asserting the judgment is against the weight of evidence. It covers: (1) wrongful acceptance of evidence; (2) unjustified inferences or conclusions; (3) absence of acceptable evidence supporting findings; or (4) appellant’s evidence qualitatively outweighing respondent’s evidence. The appellate court re-evaluates evidence to determine if the trial court’s conclusion was justified. Unlike specific grounds alleging particular errors, the omnibus ground invites overall review of evidentiary support for the judgment.