When a marriage ends, does a stepparent who never legally adopted their stepchild owe that child maintenance post-divorce?
This was the legal dilemma handed to first-year law students at the 2026 Kovsie Moot Court Competition, hosted by the University of the Free State (UFS) and held at the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) in Bloemfontein in August 2026.
Representing Boston City Campus, a diverse team of first-year LLB students took on this complex challenge and brought home second place for Best Heads of Argument for the Appellant.
The legal problem at hand: stepparent maintenance after divorce
This year’s facts were based on a divorce matter. At the centre of this moot court dispute sat a question that South African family law is still attempting to settle. "We looked at what happens when a parent and a stepparent get divorced, and specifically at whether a stepparent who did not adopt their stepchild has any legal duty to maintain that child post-divorce," said Educator and Coach Naseegah Samaai.
In the moot problem, the matter reached the Supreme Court of Appeal as an appeal against a Rule 43 order - an interim maintenance order granted by the High Court while the divorce itself was still pending. Students therefore had to work from the judgment handed down in the High Court and persuade the Supreme Court of Appeal that it was correct or incorrect, depending on which side they were arguing for.
For the students participating in the competition, answering this question meant reading well beyond the facts. The students were expected to apply civil procedural law and a general introduction to family law, and to show how the two work together to craft the most persuasive and legally valid arguments.
Who was on the team
Representing Boston City Campus in 2026, Melleney Diergaardt, Chadley Cloete, Sinelizwi Nkomokazi, and Azania Ntanja brougt a mix of life experiences to the table, ranging from recent school-leavers to working adults and parents.
That diversity created the team's biggest hurdle, and it had nothing to do with the law. "We had to figure out a way to get them to balance the moot court with their studies," one coach explained. "Some students have their own families too. It was logistics more than anything."
Despite the juggling act, the team was, in the coaches' words, exceptionally willing, able, and excited to take on the challenge.
The training and coaching process
The coaching strategy was deliberate, as the students had to do their own research, draft their own papers and craft their own arguments. Educator and Coach, Masego Maake, remarked that "We want to train them to be analytical thinkers. So, they had to do the research, come back to us, and we would only be able to advise." The coaches pointed students towards the relevant legislation and let them find their own way through it.
The students prepared heads of argument for both appellant and respondent, and the coaches hosted training sessions where they made sure that the students were able to argue both sides of the case, and that they rotated equally when presenting arguments. This improved the team’s ability to answer challenging questions from the bench, and to formulate impactful rebuttals against the opposing side’s submissions. A student who has spent weeks building the opposing case knows exactly where their own argument is weakest, because they built the “attack” on it themselves.
Then there was the court itself. "The Supreme Court of Appeal is quite a big deal," said Maake. "A lot of people go into practice and leave practice without ever standing in the Supreme Court of Appeal. A lot of laws that shape our country are handed down from [the SCA]." The coaches also taught court etiquette: how to bow on entering the court, and how to address the bench as “Justice”, for example.
On the day the teams presented their arguments, composure was key. The students were able to think on their feet, adjust to what was required to respond to questions or rebut arguments, and overall apply knowledge of the facts that made up the case.
For the team, taking part in the competition was an unforgettable opportunity. "It was a privilege to be there," one student shared. "This opportunity doesn't come around often. I learned so much from this experience, and I would do it again."
Unfiltered, the students described the journey as an intense emotional rollercoaster - hectic, stressful, and nerve-wracking, yet equally exciting, competitive, and deeply rewarding.
What made it all worth it? Second place for Best Heads of Argument
The Boston team placed second in the category for “Best Heads of Argument” for the appellant.
Heads of argument are the written submission a team files in court before anyone stands up to speak. They set out, in order, the arguments that will be presented to the court and cite the authorities, case law and legislation, relied on for each point. Judges usually read the heads of argument first, which means a bench often forms its working view of a case before oral argument begins.
Coach Maake was quick to explain why that particular award means what it does. "In my opinion it is one of the best awards to receive, because it shows that the heads of argument were well drafted…. It shows that they were well prepared and that research went into it."
Oral advocacy attracts the attention, but heads of argument are where a case is built. An award for “Best Heads of Argument” therefore measures something specific and demanding - whether a student can find the right law, weigh it accurately and honestly, discard or address aspects of the case that do not help their client, and sequence what remains into a structure that the court can follow. The “Best Heads of Argument” category therefore rewards research discipline and written reasoning.
Why Boston keeps entering moot court competitions
Courtroom simulation is not an optional extra at Boston. Every Bachelor of Laws (LLB) student completes a final-year Simulation module - mock trial, mediation and/or arbitration - as part of the qualification.
As Dr Ernst Heydenrych, Programme Coordinator for Law at Boston, put it: "This allows our students to get a bit of a different perspective, to mingle with students who have had a different experience to them, and overall to boost student confidence and help them build their skills." For students at a private, distance-learning institution, arguing alongside teams from public universities is an external test of the standard they are held to.
If this is the kind of law student you want to be
The Boston LLB is a 540-credit degree at NQF Level 8 (SAQA ID 122702), completed in a minimum of four years, full-time or part-time. Boston does not work on a points system for entry.
Practical Legal Advocacy is built into the programme rather than bolted on: legal writing and statutory interpretation, civil and criminal procedure, alternative dispute resolution, and a dedicated final-year Simulation module covering mock trial, mediation and/or arbitration.
If a full LLB is not the right first step for you, there are two other accredited routes. The three-year Bachelor of Commerce in Law (BCom Law) suits people who want legal knowledge applied in business - compliance, governance, contracts - and it provides a pathway into further legal study, including the LLB. If your National Senior Certificate is endorsed for diploma or higher certificate study rather than degree study, the one-year Higher Certificate in Paralegal Practice is the accredited way in, and it can be used for admission to the BCom Law or LLB.
Explore our LLB vs BCom Law guide to learn how these two degrees differ.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can you study an LLB degree by distance in South Africa while working?
Yes. Boston City Campus delivers its LLB by supported open distance eLearning, with full-time and part-time options and a national network of Support Centres, so you control the time, place, path and pace of your studies. The students who represented Boston at the 2026 Kovsie Moot Court Competition included people with full-time jobs and children.
Is a private institution’s LLB recognised in South Africa?
Yes. Boston City Campus is registered with the Department of Higher Education and Training as a private higher education institution under the Higher Education Act, Act 101 of 1997 (Registration Certificate No. 2003/HE07/002). Its qualifications are accredited by the Higher Education Quality Committee of the Council on Higher Education and registered on the National Qualifications Framework by SAQA.
Can you become a legal practitioner with an LLB from a private institution?
Yes, provided the LLB is properly accredited and the institution is registered. The Constitutional Court confirmed in 2019 that an accredited LLB from a registered private higher education institution can meet the “university” requirement in section 26(1)(a) of the Legal Practice Act. Graduates must still complete the required vocational training and Legal Practice Council requirements before admission as legal practitioners.