CIVIL PROCEDURE — Evidence — Evaluation of Evidence by Trial Court — Appellate Court’s Power to Interfere Limited to Perverse Findings
Principle Statement
The duty of appraising evidence given at a trial court is pre-eminently that of the court that saw and heard the witnesses, and it is also the right of the court to ascribe values to such evidence. The Court of Appeal may not disturb the judgment of the trial court if it is supported by evidence even in the slightest degree just because it would have come to a different conclusion on the same facts... it is only when the trial court fails to comply with such requirements in the evaluation of evidence that could cause a miscarriage of justice to one of the parties that the appeal court could interfere to save the situation.
Ratio Decidendi (Source)
Per Muhammad, JSC, in Kaydee Ventures Ltd. v. The Hon. Minister of Fed. Capital Territory (2010) NLC-123-264-2002(SC) at pp. 23-24; Paras D-B.
"The duty of appraising evidence given at a trial court is pre-eminently that of the court that saw and heard the witnesses, and it is also the right of the court to ascribe values to such evidence. The Court of Appeal may not disturb the judgment of the trial court if it is supported by evidence even in the slightest degree just because it would have come to a different conclusion on the same facts... it is only when the trial court fails to comply with such requirements in the evaluation of evidence that could cause a miscarriage of justice to one of the parties that the appeal court could interfere to save the situation."
Explanation / Scope
This principle establishes that appellate courts will not interfere with trial court evaluation of evidence unless findings are perverse or cause miscarriage of justice. The trial court has the advantage of seeing witnesses. The principle applies where findings of fact are challenged. It ensures that the trial court’s role is respected. The principle reflects the limited scope of appellate review. It prevents appellate courts from substituting their views. The court must find an exception. The principle provides guidance on appellate interference with evidence evaluation.
