Who? Paul Sutton, a partner specialising in media and intellectual property matters at nine-partner City law firm Orchard.

Why is he in the news? Represents Michael Baigent and Richard Leigh, two of the three authors of the 1982 international bestseller and cult classic The Holy Blood and The Holy Grail. They are currently suing Random House, the publisher of Dan Brown's The Da Vinci Code, for copyright infringement. Proceedings were commenced in October 2004 and the case is scheduled to go to trial in the High Court at the end of February 2006.


Background: After a scholarship to read English at Oxford University followed by two years at the College of Law, he qualified into the commercial litigation department of Frere Cholmeley (subsequently Frere Cholmeley Bischoff) in 1987. He joined the litigation department of Orchard in 2002 after a number of years at Richards Butler where he specialised in media litigation.


Route to the case: Mr Sutton has worked for Jonathan Clowes, the clients' literary agency, which represents a large number of other successful authors, including Kingsley Amis, Len Deighton, Doris Lessing, and Elizabeth Jane Howard.


Thoughts on the case: 'This is an important case, not only for my clients, but because it could create a precedent in the field of copyright law. We understand that The Da Vinci Code is one of the most commercially successful books ever published, generating huge amounts of money for its author and publisher. My clients, however, regard the case as fundamentally an important point of principle and that is why they have pursued a High Court action.'


Dealing with the media: 'I have dealt with the media on a large number of high-profile cases throughout my career - acting for a host of celebrities including Elton John, Dusty Springfield, [and] Pamela Stephenson as well as well-known City institutions and film companies - so I know what's expected. I have a lot of respect for journalists who take the time to report legal stories in a truly balanced way. I am used to press coverage but interest in this case has been very considerable, being picked up by news agencies as far flung as North Korea and New Zealand. Currently this is a live court case and I cannot say much about it. Fortunately, the media have respected this and have understood why I cannot give detailed comments.'