Paul Yates
banner
probonopaul.bsky.social
Paul Yates
@probonopaul.bsky.social
Counsel & pro bono head @Freshfields, tweeting about access to justice, modern slavery & other human/fundamental rights. Chair @AIRECentre. Personal account.
😂
October 5, 2025 at 6:58 PM
When someone corrected me I was completely convinced they were wrong. I still think this qualifies as pedantry though 😂
October 5, 2025 at 6:47 PM
See the section on the Mandela effect. It's fascinating. This is bullet 3 of "other examples":
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_m...
False memory - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
October 5, 2025 at 6:46 PM
😶‍🌫️
October 5, 2025 at 11:09 AM
I know you love a pedant so have to ask - you know he doesn’t actually say “Luke” in that line right? It’s a classic example of the Mandela effect.
October 5, 2025 at 10:23 AM
Nice. It’s plum harvest day in WC1 (15kg). Crumbles incoming!
August 25, 2025 at 10:12 AM
I was kind of joking - I do take your point!
July 17, 2025 at 12:04 PM
“You can’t cause harm by voting” 👀
July 17, 2025 at 11:21 AM
(2/2) ...but feeling weirdly guilty - it seemed positively illicit to be benefitting so richly from the depths of Alex's remarkable erudition, passion & industry, scot-free.

So delighted now to be a regular contributor on ko-fi.com/podyssey
Support Alex Andreou
Support Alex Andreou
ko-fi.com
April 28, 2025 at 9:30 AM
Was that a case or a burn 🤔
April 12, 2025 at 3:57 PM
7/ Congratulations to ATLEU, @shushinluh.bsky.social & Maria Moodie for their work on these very important cases.
April 9, 2025 at 3:31 PM
6/ The court also undertakes a meticulous demolition of the LAA’s contention that the CICA application process is “straightforward” [98-109].
April 9, 2025 at 3:31 PM
5/ “Fairness demands that these Claimants should be able to present their cases for compensation effectively at the first time of applying” [96].
April 9, 2025 at 3:31 PM
4/ This argument is brutally described in lawyerspeak as a “surprising conclusion” [92] (BrE: obviously wrong).
April 9, 2025 at 3:31 PM
3/ Particularly short shrift is reserved for the LAA’s submission that ECF was applied for at “a very early stage in the process” [82] -- ie, that it would have been more appropriate to apply for ECF *after* a CICA application had been refused.
April 9, 2025 at 3:31 PM
2/ tl;dr: the LAA was wrong to refuse ECF to these four trafficking survivors for their CICA application – to do so was a breach of their article 6 ECHR rights.
April 9, 2025 at 3:31 PM