WHETHER APPELLATE COURT SHALL EVALUATE THE EVIDENCE RELIED UPON BY THE LOWER COURTS
Saheed Afeez Ayinde
Upon appeal to the Apex court In this case, the Learned counsel for the Appellant has accused the lower Court of failing to evaluate the evidence of the prosecution and the defence by the trial Court without showing any special circumstances that would warrant such interference.
Thence, the apex in this case had painstakingly analysed and cleared it’s position as an Appellate court
As noted in the wordings of per Tabai JSC
Eyo v Onuoha (201 1) 11 NWLR (Pt. 1257) 1 at 38
‘It is settled principle of law that the duty of evaluation of evidence is pre-eminently that of the trial Court which alone has the benefit of seeing and hearing witness in the course of the testimonies; it is the trial Court that has the singular benefit of watching the demeanour of witnesses in the course of their testimonies. .
As a general rule therefore, an Appellate C ourt would not disturb the findings of a trial C ourt unless it is proved that the findings are not supported by the evidence on record and therefore Perverse. This is because of the Appellate Court’s disadvantage of not having seen or heard the witnesses.
Islamist || Educational || Motivational || Legal || Public Speaker || Professional || Activist ||