"The law is again firmly established that findings of fact must be based on admissible evidence (oral or documentary). Where it is however otherwise and based on inadmissible evidence, the finding will be held as perverse and the law enjoins an appellate court to interfere there with and set it aside. See Olayinka v. state (2007) 9 NWLR (Pt. 1040) 561 at 578, where it was held that a decision is perverse where:
i). It is speculative and not based on any evidence;
ii). the court took into account matters which it ought not to have taken into account; or
iii). the court has ignored the obvious. See again Umah v. Akpabio (2014) 7 NWLR (Pt. 1407)472 at 488.

PER C.B.OGUNBIYI,J.S.C IN THE CASE OF SOPAKIRIBA IGBIKIS V THE STATE; LER(2017) SC. 316/2014