Who? Adam Tudor, partner at Carter-Ruck in London.

Why is he in the news? Represented the Mahmood family, who received a full apology last month from Mail columnist Katie Hopkins and £150,000 in libel damages in relation to two articles published in December 2015, following the refusal by US authorities to allow some members of the family, who are Muslims, to board a flight for the US. The family had planned a trip to Disneyland.

Thoughts on the case: ‘The Mahmoods’ victory is particularly gratifying as the articles were not only libellous but among the most vitriolic and prejudiced I have seen published by a mainstream media organisation.

‘The case certainly underlines the need to keep in place sensible libel laws, and above all to ensure access to justice for ordinary people. The denouement also demonstrates the pitfalls of trying, as Katie Hopkins did, to sneak out an apology on Twitter in the small hours in the hope that no one will see it – only in this instance for it then to be retweeted to around 15 million people by, among others, JK Rowling and Gary Lineker.’

Dealing with the media: ‘In this case, most journalists had treated the original story of the Mahmoods’ travel problems in a pretty balanced way, so they were quite keen to come back to the story when the libel case was resolved in the family’s favour.’

Why become a lawyer? ‘It seemed the natural thing to do for someone who liked a good argument. At Carter-Ruck I’ve been extremely lucky to be able to work on an enormous variety of cases, representing clients ranging from heads of state and multinational companies to a London bus driver wrongly trashed by a tabloid. It is never dull.’

Career high: Acting for Kate and Gerry McCann, including in their successful complaints against the News of the World, Star and Express. It has been a privilege to represent two individuals who, placed in the most appalling predicament, have nevertheless conducted themselves with such dignity.’

Career low: ‘As a new trainee I was given sole responsibility to arrange for a senior dignitary to give evidence in the High Court from Washington DC via videolink. When the TV came on nothing happened – the witness could not get into the building and we had to adjourn. The judge was not happy.’