Rand West City Local Municipality v Quill Associates (Pty) Ltd and Another

Quill Associates (Pty) Ltd supplied a software program (the BIQ program) to predecessors of the Rand West City Local Municipality under licence agreements. After termination of the agreement, the municipality continued using the software without paying licence fees, leading Quill to sue for copyright infringement under the Copyright Act 98 of 1978. The High Court granted interdictory relief and awarded monetary compensation in the form of a reasonable royalty and licence fees, together with interest at 15.5% per annum a tempore morae and VAT if payable. After partial payment, Quill caused the Registrar to issue a writ of execution claiming the outstanding balance, calculating interest from date of summons, compounded monthly, and including VAT. The sheriff attached funds from the municipality’s bank account. The municipality applied to set aside the writ, arguing it was not in accordance with the court order. The High Court dismissed the application, and the municipality appealed to the Supreme Court of Appeal.

The appeal was upheld with costs, including costs of two counsel. The order of the High Court was set aside and replaced with an order setting aside the writ of execution. Quill Associates (Pty) Ltd was ordered to pay the costs of the application.

The case clarifies that the issuing of a writ of execution by a Registrar is not administrative action under PAJA and must be assessed on legality and conformity with the court order. It reaffirms the strict requirement that a writ must not exceed or vary the terms of the judgment it seeks to enforce, particularly regarding interest and VAT. The judgment provides important guidance on mora interest, compound interest, and the limits of execution proceedings in South African civil procedure.