1. What is the purpose of creating different categories of visitor? Do the existing categories fulfil these purposes?
Set out what the categories are. Is the purpose of these categories related to on-entry or after-entry control? Your answer may be speculative to some extent, but look at the rules and see if you can infer their purpose from them. Then consider what these rules are capable of achieving.
2. What is the issue to be decided in an Article 8 appeal in a visitor’s application? Does this differ from Article 8 appeals in other contexts?
What elements of Article 8 are engaged in family visitor cases? Answer with reference to the case law. Compare with Article 8 cases on entry for settlement, and on removal and deportation.
3. Should family visitor appeals be reinstated? Should appeal rights for all visitors be reinstated?
State under what conditions visitors may now have a right of appeal. What are the problems of not having a right of appeal? What are the practical alternatives to an appeal? Do these address the issues that need to be addressed and if not what are the shortcomings? What are the disadvantages of an appeal system, including any reasons that the government had for abolishing these rights? Conclude with your evaluation of the balance of these factors. Under the present appeals regime, would it have any effect to allow appeals for family visitors and not for others?