OKOROJI V. EZUMAH

• Pages: 87-90

NIGERIAN SUPREME COURT CASES [1961] N.S.C.C.



87

seen and heard the witnesses will vary according to the class of case, and,

it may be, the individual case in question".

This statement by Lord Thankerton, has not been doubted but it has been quali-

5



fied in the case

Benmax v. Austin Motor Co. Ltd. (1955) A.C. 370; also

(1955)

All

E.R.

326. The headnote of the report reads:-

There is a distinction between the finding of a specific fact and a finding of

fact which is really an inference drawn from facts specifically found. In the case

10



of the latter the appellate tribunal will more readily form an independent opinion

than in the case of the former which involves the evaluation of the evidence of

witnesses, particularly where the finding could be founded on their credibility

or bearing.

15



Turning to the present appeal, however, it is clear from the record of appeal

that ample evidence was before the learned trial Judge, but it appears clear from

his judgment that he could not evaluate the evidence before him so as to form an

opinion on the case as a whole.

Throughout his judgment the learned Judge avoided making specific findings

20



of facts on issues before him, nor did he make any attempt to draw inferences

from facts before him. I am satisfied from the whole record that he has not taken

proper advantage of having seen and heard the witnesses in the case, and in my

view this is a proper case to be sent back for a rehearing.

I would allow this appeal. Judgment and order as to costs made in the court

25



below will be set aside. The case will be remitted to the Court below for a rehear-

ing by another Judge. The appellant is entitled to costs in this Court assessed at

50 guineas. The appellant is also entitled to costs in the Court below which is to

await the fresh hearing and is to be assessed by the trial Judge at the conclusion

of the case.

30



BRETT, F.J.:

I concur.

UNSWORTH, F.J.:

I concur.

Appeal allowed.

Rehearing ordered.

OKOROJI V. EZUMAH.

RODERICK NWANKWO OKOROJI



APPELLANT

V

NWAFOR EZUMAH



RESPONDENT

SUIT NO. FSC 103/1960

45 FEDERAL SUPREME COURT.

ADEMOLA,



C.J.F.

TAYLOR,



F.J.

BAIRAMIAN,



F.J.

5th April, 1961.

50

Tort - Libel and Slander - Damages - Amount - Law assessment by Judge

because parties close relatives -- wrong principle of Law - Courts - Appellate

court's jurisdiction to review damages.

35

40