I have come across the below extract from the immigration rules on the UK government's official page. The extract is from the article "VISITORS APPENDIX 3. PERMITTED ACTIVITIES FOR ALL VISITORS". Link is here.
25 Visitors may carry out the following study:
(a) educational exchanges or visits with a state funded school or academy or independent school; or
(b) a maximum of 30 days study on:
(i) recreational courses (not English language training);
(ii) a short-course (which includes English language training) at an accredited institution;
provided that the main purpose of the visit is not to study and the study is not at a state funded school or academy.
I can't help thinking it contains contradictory meanings - it first allows (a) "visits with a state funded school", but later it states "provided...and the study is not at a state funded school". Does the "provided...and the study is not at a state funded school" apply to both activities (a) and (b), or just (b)? If only (b), the last line should be within section (b), not existing independently after one spacing. So it should apply to both, considered the first line states visitors can carry out "the following study" which includes "visits" in (a).
If a visitor plans a meeting with a state school, it makes perfect sense to have the meeting at the school. If the educational visit with a school is a form of 'study' in a broad sense, under the rule it can only happen at a non-state school, not at a state one?!
I'm trying to think what it meant to say is, for real study like a course (which is different to a visit) it should only take place at a non-state school, but for visits - whether it happens at a state-funded school it does not matter. If this is correct, isn't the wording of the article confusing?
Since it is an article written by government, I cannot help to think I did not understand it right.
I appreciate if you guys can share your thoughts on this. Thank you!