1. What is the purpose of the probationary period for partners?  Why do you think that the government has not implemented a probationary period for other adult relatives?

The first part of the question can be answered quite briefly. It might lead you to consider what level of state intervention is appropriate in this matter. Consider the kinds of relationship adult relatives have to the sponsor, as compared with a partner. Consider the reasons they are coming. What is achieved by a probationary period? Could this have any application to other adult relatives?

2. What role is there for immigration control in the prevention of forced marriages?

Consider whether and how migration is related to forced marriages. Establish the reasons for opposing forced marriages and consider whether they should be prevented or punished. Consider what harm is sought to be prevented by taking immigration measures and what are the possible effects of using immigration control for this purpose. Take into account whether there are victims and perpetrators, and if so, who these people are, and what leverage and support is available to tackle forced marriage.

3. Why are governments resistant to allowing third party support to meet the maintenance requirement?

Read the case law which has considered third party support, and in particular the arguments made for the Secretary of State. What is the effect of the Supreme Court judgment in MM v SSHD [2017] UKSC 10.

You might also want to look at the Family Migration Consultation where the government provided their justifications for removing third party support despite the judgement in the Mahad case.?

4. Draft your own immigration rule for the admission of children, taking into account the policy priorities you would consider most important. How does this compare with the existing rules?

An opportunity for creativity, and for you to think about what balance you would make between an ‘immigration law approach’ and a ‘family law approach’ as described in this chapter.