Decision of lower courts

• Pages: 482-483

482

888. What appellate Court looks for when considering appeal before it.

“What an appellate Court ought to decide is whether the decision of the trial Court

was right and not whether its reasons were and a misdirection not occasioning injustice

is immaterial. See Ukejianya v. Uchendu (1950) 13 W.A.C.A. 45 at 46; Emmanuel

Ayeni and others v. William Sowemimo (1982) 5 S.C. 60 at 73 -75.” - Per Iguh,

J.S.C., in Agbeje v. Ajibola Suit No. S.C.34/1996; (2002) 2 N.W.L.R (Pt. 750) 127

at 145.

(48) DECISION OF AN APPELLATE COURT

889. Decision of an appellate Court.

(1) “In so far as the Court below has not alleged a misdirection or error in law which

affected the judgment of the trial Court or went to the root of it, the judgment ought

to be sustained. It is trite law that what a Court of Appeal should decide is whether

the decision of the Judge is right and not whether the reasons were. See: Ukejianya

v. Uchendu 13 W.A.C.A. 45 at 46 and Emmanuel Taiwo Ayeni v. WA Sowemimo

(1982) 5 S.C. 60 at 73 and 75.” - Per Onu, J.S.C., in Uzochukwu v. Eri Suit No.

S.C.11/1991; (1997) 7 N.W.L.R. (Pt.514) 535 at 557.

(2) “In this connection, it ought to be stressed that what an appellate Court has to

decide is, whether the decision of the trial Judge was tight, whether his reasons

were. Misdirection not occasioning injustice is immaterial. It is only if the misdirection

had caused him to arrive at an erroneous or wrong decision that it would be material.

See: Ukejianyu v. Uchendu 13 W.A.C.A. 45 at 46 and Emmanuel Taiwo Ayeni &

Ors. v. William Abiodun Sowemimo (1982) 5 S.C. 60 at 73 75.” - Per Iguh, J.S.C.,

in Uzochukwu v. Eri Suit No. S.C.11/1991; (1997) 7 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 514) 535 at

551.

890. Decision of Court not founded on any sound principle of law.

“The Court’s decision based on that point raised suo motu can therefore not be

allowed to stand. Similarly as the decision of the Court to revert the judgment of the

trial Court on the cross-action was not founded on any sound principle of law or

supported by the facts on record, that decision should not be allowed to stand.” - Per

Akintan, J.C.A., in Anyabine v Okolo Suit No. CA/B/247/91; (1998) 13 N.W.L.R.

(Pt. 582) 444 at 467.

(49) DECISION OF LOWER COURTS

891. Need for appellate Court to uphold a correct decision of the trial Court

even though its reasons for the decision is faulted.

“In this respect it is the law that an appellate Court is mainly concerned with

correctness of the decision of a lower Court over which it exercises appellate

jurisdiction. So long as the lower Court has come to a correct decision even though

its reasoning in reaching the decision are faulted, nevertheless the decision would be

Paras. 888-891 478