Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
06 February 2024 | Story Valentino Ndaba | Photo SUPPLIED
Moot Court 2023
UFS Law Clinic Team (from behind) Ayant Jaggan, Christopher Rawson, Lesenyego Makone, Lesley-Ann Terblanche, Palesa Dingiswayo and Paul Antohnie (Director).

The University of the Free State's (UFS) Faculty of Law recently hosted the 19th annual Kovsie First-Year Moot Court Competition, in collaboration with the UFS Law Clinic and South Africa’s Supreme Court of Appeal.

The event, which took place late last year, marked a significant milestone in experiential legal education, showcasing the dedication and expertise of the university's budding legal minds.

According to Moot Court Coordinator Palesa Dingiswayo, “The competition aimed to empower aspiring legal minds by giving them an opportunity to showcase their skills and knowledge in a simulated courtroom setting. The participants had to research, write, and present their arguments on a challenging case involving customary law, constitutional law, and the law of succession. The case was designed to test their understanding of the law, their ability to apply it to complex facts, and their persuasive power in oral advocacy.”

Recognising excellence

The competition presented awards acknowledging outstanding accomplishments, including the Best Heads of Arguments Award (awarded to Larieschka King and Saurav Maharaj from the University of Johannesburg (UJ), bestowed upon the team that crafted the most lucid, succinct, and persuasive written submissions. This accolade honours proficiency in law and the skill to present arguments logically and cohesively. The Best Speaker Award (awarded to Sechaba Mkhaya from the University of Pretoria) recognises the individual who captivated the judges with their eloquent presentation. This distinction celebrates confidence, charisma, and creativity in delivering arguments with flair and finesse. Lastly, the Best Overall Team Award (awarded to Larieschka King and Saurav Maharaj from UJ) went to the team that excelled in both written and oral aspects. This award acknowledges passion, dedication, and commitment to the cause of justice.

Dingiswayo shared insights into what set the finalists apart in terms of their approach, legal acumen, or presentation skills, stating, "According to the feedback from the judges, the overall team demonstrated an extensive understanding of the law relevant to the competition, enhancing their capacity to address related issues based on the given facts. They showcased excellent research skills. The winning team submitted articulate, concise, and well-crafted heads of arguments that meticulously addressed the legal issues at hand. Moreover, they exhibited strong oral advocacy skills in effectively responding to questions."

Preparation is key

Itumeleng Molelengoane, Former Junior Moot Officer and incoming Chairperson of the UFS’s Moot Court organising group Legal Behemoth, provided insight into the competition's success, emphasising the importance of training sessions.

“I provided training and guidance to the junior law students who participated in the competition,” Molelengoane said. “I hosted three training sessions per semester, where they were taught the basics of research and writing skills, oral advocacy, and court etiquette. I also provided them with feedback and tips on how to improve their performance in the weeks leading up to the competition.” 

The finalist team

First-year student Omphemetse Sothomela, a member of the UFS team that advanced to the finals, highlighted the difficulties in formulating a strong argument for a party facing unfavourable case law and legislation: “This was challenging because we had to tread carefully on the facts in trying to understand how we could give her case some legal and factual substance. We also had to do all of this while sticking to the facts before us and not fabricating anything – and I think that was quite a challenging task.”

Sothomela expressed gratitude for the real-life experience gained and highlighted the importance of teamwork in moot court competitions.

Siyanda Fojile, another finalist from the UFS Team, discussed the challenge of making sense of vague facts in the case. Fojile highlighted the opportunity to learn about court procedure, the importance of respect in and out of the courtroom, and the value of clear and precise writing. “Appearing in the Supreme Court of Appeal was an opportunity I didn't take for granted. It gave me an opportunity to learn more about how one should carry themselves both inside and outside of the courtroom,” Fojile said.

Participants in the Moot Court Competition also learned about ethics and professional conduct during a talk by the Honourable Judge Lani Opperman of the High Court.

According to the organisers, “The 19th Annual Kovsies First-Year Moot Court Competition not only showcased legal acumen but also exemplified the commitment of the University of the Free State's Faculty of Law to providing transformative experiential learning opportunities for its students.” 

Honourable Judge Lani Opperman at the Supreme Court of Appeal.

Honourable Judge Lani Opperman at the Supreme Court of Appeal.

News Archive

Council on Higher Education LLB qualification review not yet complete
2017-05-16

The reaction from various stakeholders following the ‘Outcomes of the National Review of the LLB Qualification’ by the Council on Higher Education (CHE) on 12 April 2017 requires the CHE to clarify that the national review process has not been completed and is ongoing.

The peer-review process conducted under the auspices of the CHE is based on the LLB Standards Document which was developed in 2014-2015 with input from higher-education institutions and the organised legal profession. Following self-review and site visits by peers, the process is now at the point where commendations and shortcomings have been identified, and the statement of 12 April reflects those findings. All law faculties and schools have been asked to improve their LLB programmes to meet the LLB Standard, and no LLB programme has been de-accredited. All institutions retain the accreditation they had before the Review process began and all institutions are working towards retaining their accreditation and improving their LLB programmes.

The South African Law Deans’ Association (SALDA) has issued a set of responses regarding the LLB programme review. The following questions and answers were published to give more clarity on the questions raised.

1.    What is the effect of a finding of conditional accreditation?
The programme remains accredited.

(“Accreditation refers to a recognition status granted to a programme for a stipulated period of time after an HEQC evaluation indicates that it meets minimum standards of quality.”)

The institution must submit a progress report by 6 October 2017 that indicates how short-term aspects raised in the HEQC reports have been addressed and an improvement plan to indicate how longer-term aspects will be addressed.

2.    What is the effect of a finding of notice of withdrawal of accreditation?
The programme remains accredited.

The institution must submit an improvement plan by 6 October 2017 to indicate how the issues raised in the HEQC report will be addressed, including time frames.

3.    How does the finding of notice of withdrawal affect current students?
Students currently enrolled for the LLB programme at any institution are not affected at all. They will graduate with an accredited qualification.

4.    How does the finding of notice of withdrawal affect new applicants?
The programmes remain accredited and institutions may enrol new students as usual. This also includes students completing BA/BCom (Law) programmes who wish to continue with the LLB programme.

5.    How does the finding of notice of withdrawal affect prior graduates?
Degrees previously conferred are not affected.

6.    What happens when the improvement plans are submitted in October 2017?
The CHE will evaluate the plans when they are submitted, and the programmes remain accredited until a decision is taken whether the improvement plan is sufficient and has been fully given effect to or not. The institutions will have to submit progress reports to the CHE indicating implementation of measures contained in the improvement plan.

Should a decision at some stage be taken that a programme’s accreditation must be withdrawn, a teaching-out plan would be implemented so that all enrolled students would have the opportunity to graduate with an accredited degree.

For more information on the CHE’s pronouncement please contact Moleboheng Moshe-Bereng on MosheBerengMF@ufs.ac.za.

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