The Supreme Court has reaffirmed that an appeal court is bound by a trial judge’s findings of fact where they are based on cogent evidence, and should be slow to draw different inferences from the same factual material.
In a judgment dated 11 July 2017, Mr Justice John MacMenamin said he agreed with the judgment of the Chief Justice in an appeal brought by The Leopardstown Club Limited against Templeville Developments Limited and Philip Smyth. The source does not state the overall order made in the appeal, so the precise outcome cannot be established from this judgment alone.
The dispute followed a High Court trial lasting about 14 days. Justice MacMenamin said the trial judge had the opportunity to assess witnesses and documentary evidence. A key issue concerned whether Mr Smyth had given a credible account of his knowledge of a transverse cable. Templeville Developments was under his control, and the judge had found his evidence on misrepresentation not credible.
Justice MacMenamin said that finding had an evidential basis. He referred to Mr Smyth’s answers under cross-examination on the tenth day of the trial, which he said were vague and irreconcilable with documents, including documents from Templeville Developments. The Court of Appeal had also concluded that the trial judge’s findings were based on cogent evidence.
The judgment set out a narrow exception to the rule binding appellate courts to supported findings: a clear failure to engage with essential evidence. Justice MacMenamin said the threshold was high. The omission would have to go to the core or essential validity of the findings, leaving them so flawed that they could not reasonably be supported by the evidence.
An appeal court could not meet that threshold simply by pointing to other evidence that might support a different conclusion or by reweighing particular witnesses or documents, he said. Justice MacMenamin cited Hay v. O’Grady and related Irish authorities, and distinguished the Irish approach from jurisdictions where appellate review is described in terms of deference. Under the stated Irish rule, he said, the appeal court is bound by findings based on clear and cogent evidence.