• “It is a trite legal principle that the duty of a court is to evaluate the evidence before it and then arrived at a finding arising from the evaluated evidence. Failure to do this, can amount to a miscarriage of justice.  In Atuyeye & Ors vs. Ashamu (1987) 1 SC 333, the apex court per Oputa, JSC (of blessed memory) held:

“The trial Court has a legal duty to properly evaluate the evidence led on both sides before coming to a decision, which decision must inevitably be based on the totality of the evidence thus properly appraised or evaluated. If it fails in this duty it commits an error of law. The party aggrieved can then appeal on the ground of error in law giving as his particulars of error the failure to properly assess or evaluate or appraise the evidence led by and on his behalf.”

Similarly in Tinubu vs. Khalil & Dibbo Transport Ltd (2000) 11 NWLR ( pt 677) 171, Ejiwunmi, JSC  held:

“It is settled that the cardinal duty of a trial Court was to make such findings as deemed appropriate upon facts led at a trial. Where a trial Court failed to discharge that duty, it could be said that there had been a miscarriage of justice. This is because where the trial Court has failed to discharge this primary duty; it becomes difficult for an appellate Court to consider properly the merits of an appeal in the absence of the findings of the trial Court. This is more so where the evidence would require for consideration of the credibility of witnesses who gave evidence at the trial.”

The apex court recently in Arije vs Arije & Anor (2018) LPELR-44193 (SC), Kekere- Ekun, JSC at pages 20-21 drove home this point in these words:

“It is well settled that the evaluation of evidence is primarily the exclusive preserve of the trial Court, which has the unique opportunity of seeing and hearing the witnesses testify and of observing their demeanour. However, both the trial Judge and the appellate Courts have equal right to evaluate documentary evidence. Where the trial Court failed to evaluate the evidence, or failed to evaluate it properly or where such evaluation results in a perverse conclusion, the appellate Court, has a duty to re-assess and evaluate the evidence in order to reach a just Conclusion. See: Gonzee Nig. Ltd. vs. Nigerian Educational Research and Devt. Council & Ors (2005) 13 NWLR (Pt. 943) 634; Ogunleye vs. Oni (1990) 2 NWLR (Pt. 135) 745; Iwuoha vs. NIPOST Ltd (2003) 8 NWLR (Pt. 822) 308; Rev. King vs. The State (2016) LPELR-40046 (SC) 1 @ 49 A D.

”PER E.TOBI, J.C.A  IN THE CASE OF CHIDI UKACHUKWU V. MR AMOS OLATOKUNBO KUKOYI & ORS: LEGALPEDIA ELECTRONIC CITATION: (2019)CA/L/854/2008