It needs to be noted however that this Court, especially as a second appellate court, is at all times very slow to disturb concurrent findings of facts made by the trial and first appellate courts, except the existence of special situations such as the commission of a grave error which has occasioned a miscarriage of justice. In Koglex Ltd v Field [1999-2000] 2 GLR 437, the Supreme Court held that: “Where the first appellate Court had confirmed the findings of the trial Court, the second appellate Court was not to interfere with the concurrent findings unless it was established with absolute clearness that some blunder or error resulting in a miscarriage of justice was apparent in the way in which the lower Court dealt with the facts. Instances where such concurrent findings may be interfered with included where the findings of the trial Court were clearly unsupported by the evidence on record or where the reasons in support of the findings were unsatisfactory; where there was improper application of a principle of evidence or where the trial Court had failed to draw an irresistible conclusion from the evidence; where the findings are based on a wrong proposition of law and that if that proposition be corrected, the findings would disappear; and where the finings was inconsistent with crucial documentary evidence on record.” See also Gregory v Tandoh IV & Hanson [2010] SCGLR 971; Achoro & Another V Ankafela & Another [1996-97] SCGLR 209.