IN THE GAMBIA COURT OF APPEAL

ISSUE THREE
Whether the Appellants case at the Lower Court could have succeeded without
the two written agreements which had been rejected.
By the tenor of their argument in this appeal the Appellants are alleging that the
Learned Trial Judge failed to evaluate the evidence placed before her at the trial
court. It is by reason of this fact that the Appellants are inviting this court to go
down stairs to the trial court, re-evaluate the evidence tendered there, set aside
the findings not supported by evidence, substituting same with findings which
ought properly to have been made having regards to the evidence.
It is trite learning, that an appellate court usually will not interfere with the
findings of fact made by a trial court after a proper evaluate of the evidence,
unless there was no proper evaluation of the evidence led by both sides on the
point. It is the duty of the trial court to review and evaluate all relevant and
material evidence, before it, before making any findings of facts. Where the trial
court fails to make proper use of its opportunities to appraise the evidence given
before it, this court can dismiss the findings of facts of the said Trial Court. In
the case of Armanti Gambia Company Ltd V DHL International (Gambia)
Ltd (2002-2008) 1 GR 194, the Supreme Court of the Gambia put the
position thus. “As a general rule, an appellate court does not disturb findings of
fact made by a trial court unless it can be demonstrated that the said findings of
fact are perverse, or are not supported by the evidence on record, or absurd in
that no reasonable tribunal applying itself to the same facts, could have reached
the same findings.” See Singam Investment Company Gambia Ltd V
Nasser H Farage (2002-2008) GR 68 Christiana Williams V Melville
Williams (CA 37/2007). Similarly, in the case of Fashonu V Adekoya
(1974) 1 ALL NLR (pt.1) 35 at 41, The Supreme Court of Nigeria
postulated this principle of law in the following language:
25