Appraisal of evidence by trial court

• Pages: 290-290

290

(30) APPRAISAL OF EVIDENCE BY TRIAL COURT

505. Appraisal of evidence by trial Court and attitude of appellate Court

thereto.

(1) “In Chief Victor Woluchem & ors v. Chief Simon Gudi (1981) 5 S.C. 291

at 326 the Supreme Court Per Nnamadi J.S.C., observed: - “It is now settled

that if there has been a proper appraisal of evidence by a trial Court, a Court of

Appeal ought not to embark on a fresh appraisal of the same evidence in order

to merely to arrive at a different conclusion form than reached by the trial Court.

Furthermore, if a Court of trial unquestionably evaluates the evidence, then it is

not the business of a Court of Appeal to substitute its view for the views of the

trial Court.” – Per Oguntade, J.C.A., in Suleman v. Osideinde Suit No. CA/I/

31/91; (1994) 2 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 327) 477 at 489.

(2) “There is no doubt that there was abundant evidence before the lower Court

on the question of the Head and Secretary of Igan Ruling House upon which the

trial Judge came to the conclusion in favour of the defence case. He had the

advantage of seeing the witnesses testify and there was also to a plethora of

documentary evidence, which inclined to the view taken by the trial Judge. I

agree with his conclusion that the 1st defendant had been the head of the Igan

Ruling House from 5-1-86 and that Mr. Akin Sowale became the Secretary of

Igan Ruling House after the 2nd plaintiff resigned at the Secretary.” – Per

Oguntade, J.C.A., in Suleman v. Osideinde Suit No. CA/I/31/91; (1994) 2

N.W.L.R. (Pt. 327) 477 at 489-490.

506. Court of Appeal’s attitude when genuineness of documents are in doubt.

“It is in our view, not open to the Court of Appeal to raise issues, which the parties

did not raise for themselves either at the trial or during the hearing of appeal. There

may be occasions during the hearing of an appeal, however, when the genuineness

of any document tendered during the trial of a case may appear to the Court hearing

the appeal to be in doubt. In such a case, and only if it is material to the determination

of the appeal the party or parties who were supposed to have executed the document

in question should be given an opportunity to explain the discrepancy before any

opinion is expressed as to the genuineness of the document.” - Per Fatayi-Williams

in Kuti v. Jibowu Suit No. S.C.291/1971; (1972) 7 N.S.C.C. 447 at 455.

507. When appellate Court will reappraise evidence.

“In my view the learned trial Judge was in error when he held that Exhibit B was an

act of possession by the appellants, and therefore the Court of Appeal was right

when it reappraised and re-evaluated the evidence on the printed record before it in

order to arrive at a fair and just decision. See Fashanu v. Adekoya (1974) 6 S.C. 83

particularly at 91.” - Per Wali, J.S.C., in Oko v. Ntukidem Suit No. S.C.30/1989;

(1993) 24 N.S.C.C. (Pt. I) 225 at 232; (1993) 2 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 274) 124 at 135.

Paras. 505-507