We are of the opinion that indeed the learned trial judge did an exhaustive examination of the case law and principles covering fair practice in evaluating what the appellant had done with the Respondent’s work before concluding that the: “the Defendant infringed the copyright in Plaintiff’s work in the use of it within “Gateway to English” and the use to which the Plaintiff’s work was put did not constitute a permitted use, and the mode of presentation did not constitute fair practice.” The learned trial judge found as a fact that there is no controversy about the Plaintiff’s work being protected by the Copyright Act.” The learned Court of Appeal judge then proceeds to apply the “trite law” that where the trial judge’s findings are supported by the evidence on record, an appellate court should not disturb those findings. The Court of Appeal, therefore, decides not to disturb the learned trial judge’s findings of fact. By doing this, the Court clearly “failed to address the import of the provision in section 2 of Act 690 that the respondent did not have copyright in the plot of Woes of the African Mother or a summary of it, as in Gateway to English for Junior Secondary Schools”, which is the grievance set out in Additional Ground B. This grievance is indubitably well-founded and the Court of Appeal’s error makes it inevitable that this appeal be allowed. Conclusion In my discussion earlier of section 2 of Act 690, I have demonstrated that there is a preliminary question of law which has to be established before any of the findings of fact which the learned trial judge purported to make can validly be made. I have found that what was replicated in the Summary was 19