CORAM
EMMANUEL OLAYINKA AYOOLA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
AUGUSTINE NNAMANI, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
ENGINEER EMMANUEL OSOLU APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
This is an appeal by the plaintiff against the decision of the Court of Appeal, Enugu Division, whereby on the 20th day of November, 1997, the judgment of Offiah J, (as he then was) sitting at Nnewi High Court of Anambra State was set aside.?
HELD
Appeal allowed?
ISSUES
“1. Whether the learned Justices of the Court of Appeal were right in setting aside the findings of fact made by the trial court in this case.2. Whether the court below was right to have held that the appellant’s conduct seems to lend credence to the allegation that he is not interested in performing the second burial ceremony of his late father.3. Was the Court of Appeal right when it held that the learned trial judge failed to make specific findings of fact in respect of important issues raised in this case.4. On the facts and circumstances of this case, was the Court of Appeal right in setting aside the judgment of the trial court and remitting the case back to Anambra State High Court (Sitting at Nnewi) for trial de Novo”
RATIONES DECIDENDI
RE-EVALUATION OF EVIDENCE BY THE APPELLATE COURT
It is settled law that an appellate court does not embark on re-evaluation of the evidence of witnesses in order to use it as an excuse for interfering with the findings of the trial court. Per Dahiru Musdapher J.S.C.
PROPER EVALUATION OF EVIDENCE
The evaluation of evidence is the primary responsibility of the trial court, and an appellate court will only interfere with a finding of fact made by a trial judge where such finding is not supported by evidence led before the trial judge.
CASES CITED
Onyia V. Ozougwu (1999) 11 SCNJ 1Mogaji V. Odofin (1978) 4 SC 91Ehimare V. Emhonyon (1985) 1 NWLR (Pt. 2) 177 at 183.Ajibona V. Kolawole (1996) 7 NWLR (Pt. 476) 22 at 30.?
STATUTES REFERRED TO
None.