Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
11 May 2021

The COVID-19 pandemic has forced universities to embrace technology and find alternative ways to campus-based classes. Like most other institutions in the country, the University of the Free State (UFS) is following an online/blended learning and teaching approach during the 2021 academic year. This means that most students will spend their time online, therefore owning or having regular access to a laptop has become a necessity.

To ensure students have access to digital devices, the UFS is offering registered students the opportunity to purchase a laptop at affordable rates. Students can apply to purchase a device in order to access online platforms, obtain learning material, and engage with lecturers. The laptops will be provided interest-free through various payment options and will become the property of the student.

Who can apply for a laptop?

The offer is open to all registered students. The UFS has made provision for 3 000 laptops, and devices will be issued on a first-come, first-served basis.

What is the make, model, and cost of available devices? 

Option 1:

Make: Hewlett Packard
Model: HP 250 G7 
Style: Laptop

Price:  R5 040,34 (VAT inclusive)


Option 2:
Make: Asus
Model: X540NA-C45B0T

Price:  R5 247,97 (VAT inclusive)

The laptops are enabled with Microsoft 365 software and a step-by-step manual to help you with the personal configuration once you receive the device. 


What are the payment options?
The student must agree to the payment terms as defined by the UFS. 
The payment options are as follows: 

A. Final-year students (students who will be completing their qualifications in 2021): 

► Option 1:  Two payments – one in May 2021 and a second payment in October 2021
► Option 2:  Six payments – from May 2021 to October 2021
► Option 3: Once-off cash payment

B. New and other returning students with bursaries

► Option 1: Two payments – one in May 2021 and a second payment in October 2021 
► Option 2:  Equal payments until November 2021
► Option 3: Once-off cash payment


C. New and other returning students without bursaries (with the exclusion of final-year students)

► Option 1: Three payments – one in May 2021, a second payment in October 2021, and a final payment in March 2022 
► Option 2:  Twelve equal payments – from May 2021 to April 2022
► Option 3: Once-off cash payment
How will I receive the laptop?
 
Students will have the option of collecting a laptop from the Bloemfontein or Qwaqwa Campuses, or to collect it from a courier. We will communicate the logistics of this individually to students. 

Students who opt for courier services will be charged an additional cost of R162,71. 


When can I order a laptop?

Applications are currently open. 

To apply for a laptop, click HERE and make sure that the digital form is fully completed before submitting it via the SUBMIT button.  

Enquiries: 

Enquiries about technical support regarding the issuing of the laptops, delivery, and courier services can be directed to:  Studentdesk@ufs.ac.za | +27 51 401 2000.
 

News Archive

The failure of the law
2004-06-04

 

Written by Lacea Loader

- Call for the protection of consumers’ and tax payers rights against corporate companies

An expert in commercial law has called for reforms to the Companies Act to protect the rights of consumers and investors.

“Consumers and tax payers are lulled into thinking the law protects them when it definitely does not,” said Prof Dines Gihwala this week during his inaugural lecture at the University of the Free State’s (UFS).

Prof Gihwala, vice-chairperson of the UFS Council, was inaugurated as extraordinary professor in commercial law at the UFS’s Faculty of Law.

He said that consumers, tax payers and shareholders think they can look to the law for an effective curb on the enormous power for ill that big business wields.

“Once the public is involved, the activities of big business must be controlled and regulated. It is the responsibility of the law to oversee and supervise such control and regulation,” said Prof Gihwala.

He said that, when undesirable consequences occur despite laws enacted specifically to prevent such results, it must be fair to suggest that the law has failed.

“The actual perpetrators of the undesirable behaviour seldom pay for it in any sense, not even when criminal conduct is involved. If directors of companies are criminally charged and convicted, the penalty is invariably a fine imposed on the company. So, ironically, it is the money of tax payers that is spent on investigating criminal conduct, formulating charges and ultimately prosecuting the culprits involved in corporate malpractice,” said Prof Gihwala.

According to Prof Gihwala the law continuously fails to hold companies meaningfully accountable to good and honest business values.

“Insider trading is a crime and, although legislation was introduced in 1998 to curb it, not a single successful criminal prosecution has taken place. While the law appears to be offering the public protection against unacceptable business behaviour, it does no such thing – the law cannot act as a deterrent if it is inadequate or not being enforced,” he said.

The government believed it was important to facilitate access to the country’s economic resources by those who had been denied it in the past. The Broad Based Economic Empowerment Act of 2003 (BBEE), is legislation to do just that. “We should be asking ourselves whether it is really possible for an individual, handicapped by the inequities of the past, to compete in the real business world even though the BBEE Act is now part of the law?,” said Prof Gihwala.

Prof Gihwala said that judges prefer to follow precedent instead of taking bold initiative. “Following precedent is safe at a personal level. To do so will elicit no outcry of disapproval and one’s professional reputation is protected. The law needs to evolve and it is the responsibility of the judiciary to see that it happens in an orderly fashion. Courts often take the easy way out, and when the opportunity to be bold and creative presents itself, it is ignored,” he said.

“Perhaps we are expecting too much from the courts. If changes are to be made to the level of protection to the investing public by the law, Parliament must play its proper role. It is desirable for Parliament to be proactive. Those tasked with the responsibility of rewriting our Companies Act should be bold and imaginative. They should remove once and for all those parts of our common law which frustrate the ideals of our Constitution, and in particular those which conflict with the principles of the BBEE Act,” said Prof Gihwala.

According to Prof Gihwala, the following reforms are necessary:

• establishing a unit that is part of the office of the Registrar of Companies to bolster a whole inspectorate in regard to companies’ affairs;
• companies who are liable to pay a fine or fines, should have the right to take action to recover that fine from those responsible for the conduct;
• and serious transgression of the law should allow for imprisonment only – there should be no room for the payment of fines.
 

Prof Gihwala ended the lecture by saying: “If the opportunity to re-work the Companies Act is not grabbed with both hands, we will witness yet another failure in the law. Even more people will come to believe that the law is stupid and that it has made fools of them. And that would be the worst possible news in our developing democracy, where we are struggling to ensure that the Rule of Law prevails and that every one of us has respect for the law”.

 

 

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept