FIVE CLASSES OF ERROR OF LAW

In MMA INC & Anor v. NMA (2012) LPELR-20616 (SC) per Suleiman Galadima JSC reiterated this principle aptly thus: “… Five particular classes of errors of law, which when addressed by the grounds can be categorized as grounds of law have been set out in the decision of this Court in Comex Ltd v. Nab Ltd (1997) 3 NWLR (Pt.643) at 656- 657, while affirming the dictum of Nnaemeka-Agu JSC of blessed memory) in Nwadike v. Ibekwe (1987) 4 NWLR (Pt.67) 718 at 744-745, to wit: It is an error in law if the adjudicating Tribunal took into account some wrong criteria in reaching its conclusion or applied some wrong criteria in reaching its conclusion or applied some wrong standard of proof or; if although applying the correct criteria, it gave wrong weight to one or more of the relevant factors, see O’KELLY V. TRUSTHOUSE FORTE PLC. 19833 ALL E.R at pages 456. Several issues that can be raised on legal interpretation of deeds, documents, terms of art, words or phrases and inferences drawn therefrom are grounds of law: OGBECHIE v. ONOCHIE (NO.1) Supra at pp. 491-492. Where a ground deals merely with a matter of inference, even if it be an inference of fact, a ground framed on it is a ground of law; provided it is limited to admitted or proved and accepted facts. EDWARDS v. BAIRSTOW(supra) at p.55 H.L. For many years, it has been recognized that inferences to be drawn from a set of proved or undisputed facts, as distinct from primary facts, are matters upon which an appellate Court is as competent as the Court of trial. See BENMAX v. AUSTIN MOTORS Co. Ltd. 1949 All E.R 326 at P. 327. Where a Tribunal states the law on a point wrongly, it commits an error in law. Lastly I should mention one class of grounds of law which lead the deceptive appearance of grounds of fact id est where the complaint is that there was no evidence upon which a finding or decision was based. This is regarded as a ground of law, on the premises that in a jury trial there would have been no evidence to go to the jury. Before a Judge sitting with a jury could have left a case to the jury there ought to have been more than scintilla of evidence. So, for this rather historical reason, a ground of appeal complaining that there was no evidence, or no admissible evidence upon which a decision or finding was based has always been regarded as a ground of law.”