Randfontein Local Municipality and Another v Quill Associates (Pty) Ltd (36264/2013; 36265/2013) [2015] ZAGPPHC 638 (15 September 2015)

Randfontein Local Municipality and Another v Quill Associates (Pty) Ltd (36264/2013; 36265/2013) [2015] ZAGPPHC 638 (15 September 2015)

The court found that there were no reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The respondent's witness was credible, and the oral agreement was proved on a balance of probabilities. The applicants failed to present evidence to rebut the terms of the oral agreement and did not provide any evidence regarding what constitutes a reasonable royalty. The recusal application was found to be without merit and motivated by tactical considerations rather than genuine concerns of bias. The applicants' reliance on the recusal application as a ground of appeal was dismissed as a red herring. The court concluded that no reasonable person could perceive bias in its actions and that the applicants had...

Citation
[2015] ZAGPPHC 638
Parties
Applicant: Randfontein Local Municipality; Applicant: Westonaria Local Municipality; Respondent: Quill Associates (Pty) Ltd
Court
North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
15 September 2015
Case Number
36264/2013; 36265/2013
Procedural Posture
Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment and Orders Delivered on 31 July 2015.
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of senior counsel.
Judges
S. Potterill
Legal Topics
Leave to Appeal, Oral Agreement, Reasonable Royalty, Recusal Application
Civil Procedure Commercial and Corporate Leave to Appeal Oral Agreement Reasonable Royalty Recusal Application

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Randfontein Local Municipality

Applicant

Westonaria Local Municipality

Applicant

Quill Associates (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Leave to Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Following Judgment and Orders Delivered on 31 July 2015.

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is a reasonable prospect of success on appeal against the judgment and orders delivered on 31 July 2015.
  2. 2 Whether the oral agreement between the applicants and respondent was proved on a balance of probabilities.
  3. 3 Whether the concept of 'reasonable royalty' was correctly applied in the absence of evidence from the applicants.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that there were no reasonable prospects of success on appeal. The respondent's witness was credible, and the oral agreement was proved on a balance of probabilities. The applicants failed to present evidence to rebut the terms of the oral agreement and did not provide any evidence regarding what constitutes a reasonable royalty. The recusal application was found to be without merit and motivated by tactical considerations rather than genuine concerns of bias. The applicants' reliance on the recusal application as a ground of appeal was dismissed as a red herring. The court concluded that no reasonable person could perceive bias in its actions and that the applicants had...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal dismissed with costs, including costs of senior counsel.

Orders

  • The application for leave to appeal is dismissed.
  • The applicants are ordered to pay the costs of the application, including the costs of senior counsel.