LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE — Question of Fact — Meaning
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
A question of fact is any question determined by admission or evidence rather than by authority and argument, by the jury or judge sitting as jury, or any question not determined by a rule of law but depending on circumstances.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Obaseki, JSC, in Metal Construction (West Africa) Ltd v. Migliore (1990) NLC-2511985(SC) at p. 26; Paras A–C.
"A question of fact may be any question which has to be determined by admission or by evidence rather than by authority and argument, and by the jury or Judge sitting as jury or any question which is not determined by a rule of law but depends on the circumstances. Such a question is distinct from a question of law and from a question of judicial discretion which is concerned with a decision of what is right and reasonable or just and equitable in the circumstances."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
A question of fact is determined by evidence, not legal authority. It involves factual inquiries: what happened, when, where, how. It is distinct from questions of law (applying legal rules) and questions of judicial discretion (what is just and equitable). Factual findings are the province of the trial court, which has the advantage of seeing and hearing witnesses. Appellate courts defer to factual findings unless perverse. The classification determines whether leave to appeal is required. Questions of fact alone require leave for appeal to the Supreme Court. The distinction is crucial for appellate practice. The court examines the substance, not the label.
