Findings of fact and evaluation of evidence

• Pages: 651-652

651

(2) “It is without doubt the duty of a trial Court to assess witnesses, form impression

about them and evaluate their evidence having regard to the impression it formed

of the witnesses. The Senior District Judge did so and came to the conclusion

that the plaintiff’s witnesses were not witnesses of truth and dismissed his claim.

This finding was affirmed by the High Court and the Court of Appeal. These are

enough reasons why this Court should not disturb the findings of fact of the

lower Courts since it is not satisfied that they are unsound. See Okafor v. Idigo

(1984) 1 S.C.N.L.R. 481, Balogun v. Agboola (1974) 10 S.C. 111 and Balogun

v. Labiran (supra).” - Per Ogbuegbu, J.S.C., in Dakat v. Dashe Suit No.

S.C. 138/1991; (1997) 12 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 531) 46 at 54.

(3) “This Court cannot go into the question of credibility of witnesses, an issue

within the exclusive preserve of the trial Judge who saw and heard them. The

case of the appellant is not that there was no evidence at all to support the

finding. It was therefore unnecessary for the trial Court to consider the plaintiff’s

evidence on special damages.”- Per Ogwuegbu J.S.C., in Dakat v. Dashe

Suit No. S.C. 138/1991; (1997) 12 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 531) 46 at 54.

(4) “And in a situation where so much turns on the credibility or reliability of

witnesses, the only course open to the Court of Appeal is to remit the case to the

Court below for a retrial Chief Okpiri & Ors. v. lgono Jonah & Ors. (1961)

All N.L.R. (Pt. 2) 270 at 282.” – Per Edozie, J.C.A., in Dikwa v. Modu Suit

No. CA/J/187/92; (1993) 3 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 280) 170 at 185.

(5) “It is trite that a trial Judge has the exclusive right to believe a witness whom

he has had the advantage of listening and watching whilst giving evidence. Once

he has made proper use of this opportunity such stance cannot be faulted by an

appellate Court. See Otogbolu v. Okeluwa (1981) 6-7 S.C. 99, Folorunsho v.

Adeyemi (1975) N.M.L.R. 128 and Balogun & Ors. v. Agboola (1974) 1 All

N.L.R. (Pt. 11) page 66.”- Per Mukhtar, J.C.A., in Yahaya v. Oparinde (1997)

10 N.W.L.R (Pt. 523) 126 at 134.

(80) FINDINGS OF FACT AND EVALUATION OF EVIDENCE

1212. Appellate Court’s attitude to findings of fact and evaluation of evidence

by trial Court.

(1) “When a trial Court failed to properly evaluate the evidence before it or made

wrong inferences from admitted facts, an Appeal Court can interfere by making the

proper findings of fact justified by the evidence. See the case of Highgrade Maritine

Services Ltd. v. F.B.N. Ltd. (1991) 1 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 167) 290 at page 310.”- Per

Ogebe, J.C.A., in A.C.B. Ltd. v. Oba Suit No. CA/B/89/89; (1993) 7 N.W.L.R. (Pt.

304) 173 at 183.

647 Findings of fact and evaluation of evidence Paras. 1211-1212