LEGAL PRINCIPLE: APPELLATE PRACTICE — Standard of Review — Error in Judgment — When Appellate Court Will Interfere
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
Not every mistake or error in a judgment results in reversal; only substantial errors that occasion a miscarriage of justice warrant appellate interference. An error as to which party tendered a document, where the document was tendered without objection and its contents are clear, is not substantial.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Iguh, JSC, in Spasco Vehicle and Plant Hire Company Limited v. Alraine (Nigeria) Limited (1995) NLC-1641989(SC) at p. 22; Paras. A–C.
"It is not each and every mistake or error in a judgment that must result in the appeal being allowed. It is only when such an error or mistake is substantial in that it has occasioned a miscarriage of justice that the appellate court is bound to interfere. An error as to which party tendered a document, where the document was tendered without objection and its contents are clear, is not substantial and does not occasion a miscarriage of justice."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Appellate courts will not reverse for every error. The error must be substantial and cause a miscarriage of justice. Minor, technical, or harmless errors do not warrant interference. The appellant must demonstrate that the error materially affected the outcome. The principle applies the harmless error doctrine. The court assesses whether the result would have been different but for the error. The burden is on the appellant to show prejudice. The rule prevents appeals from succeeding on technicalities. The appellate court will affirm if substantial justice was done despite minor errors.