Case No. UKUT-00180-(IAC)

5. Contained within the error of law decision were clear directions relating to the provision of evidence on proxy marriages and their validity under Dutch law. As regards the crucial issue of expert evidence, specific questions were to be addressed by “either party” wishing to submit such evidence. 6. The appeal then came back before the Upper Tribunal on 26 March 2015, whereupon further directions were given, including a provision for the Respondent to put any questions about the expert opinion on Dutch law relied on by the claimant to her solicitors, in order that the relevant expert could address them. 7. The claimant’s solicitors produced a further expert report, served on 27 May 2015. Nothing by way of evidence or questions to the expert having emanated from the Respondent thus far, Upper Tribunal Judge Rintoul issued further directions to the parties on 20 July 2015. Direction 3a stated that: “Any material or expert evidence in response to the expert evidence adduced by the appellant must be served by the respondent on the appellant and on the Upper Tribunal at least 21 days before the hearing.” 8. The directions also required skeleton arguments from both parties, addressing all relevant issues including the recent apparent occurrence of registration of the marriage with the Dutch Embassy in Accra .