BBC presenter reveals total bill after former Manchester City player falsely called him ‘paedo defender’ in X posts
Jeremy Vine claims ex-footballer Joey Barton has now paid for his legal costs after their libel battle.
The BBC Radio 2 presenter, 60, had sued for libel and harassment over posts on X falsely calling him a “big bike nonce” and a “paedo defender”. He said the ex-Manchester City player, 42, has now paid over £500,000 for the false claims, which the Eggheads host said was a “relief just to be vindicated.
In a statement posted on X, he said: “Mr Barton has now paid out more than half a million pounds in my case alone.”
Would Have Accepted £10,000 Initially
Vine insisted, however, that he would have been fine if the former footballer had sent him £10,000 in damages in the first place.
He added: “I had no wish to be in that position and I am grateful to my lawyers in ensuring we got the final payments in today… I told Mr Barton that if he paid £10,000 total and deleted the tweets I’d forget the whole thing. It was him, not me, who decided to take the long road.”
In October 2024, Barton issued public apologies and paid £110,000 in damages to the Channel 5 broadcaster after being sued for defamation and harassment.
Dispute Over Legal Fees
But Vine argued more should be paid to cover his legal fees.
Barton’s bill, according to Vine, breaks down as follows: “110k — the libel. 160k — my costs. 3.6k — interest on costs. 43k — my costs recovery action. 200k — his costs. MINIMUM £516,600.”
Vine said Barton had initially agreed in court to pay for his legal fees but later disputed the amount.
The broadcaster’s legal team then found Barton owned his house outright and said if he had not paid the full amount, he would have had the right to evict him, become his landlord or force the sale of the house.
Court Ruling on Additional Costs
A court hearing in London earlier this month heard Barton had agreed to pay £160,000 of Vine’s costs. But Vine wanted a further £60,000 for costs over negotiating that sum.
Suzanne Holmes, for Barton, said that the request was “excessive” and should be reduced.
But Vine’s representative Kevin Latham said Barton had “repeatedly failed to engage in proper negotiation”.
The court ruled Barton should pay £43,172.20 to add to the £160,000.
Neither Barton nor Vine attended the hearing in London.
Origins of the Libel Case
The libel case stemmed from posts Barton made on X (formerly Twitter) between 8 and 12 January 2024, in which he made false allegations about Vine having a sexual interest in children. The posts were viewed millions of times and included the creation of a hashtag “#bikenonce” which trended on the platform.
Mrs Justice Steyn ruled in May 2024 that 11 of Barton’s posts were defamatory, noting that the term “nonce” was used to imply Vine “has a sexual interest in children” and that the word “bike” was “a meaningless aspect of the accusation”.
Lawyers for Vine had described Barton’s posts as a “calculated and sustained attack” on the broadcaster. Gervase de Wilde, representing Vine, said the posts contained “clear references to [Vine] having a sexual interest in children” and that the word “nonce” had “an irreducible, defamatory meaning”.
Initial Settlement and Further Action
Barton initially apologised in June 2024, stating: “I recognise that this is a very serious allegation. It is untrue. I do not believe that Mr Vine has a sexual interest in children, and I wish to set the record straight.”
He agreed to pay £75,000 in damages at that time, but solicitors for Vine later said Barton would pay a further £35,000 as part of a “separate settlement” for claims published after legal action began, bringing the total damages to £110,000.
The October 2024 hearing heard that Vine was “deeply alarmed, distressed and upset” by Barton’s actions, which included a “persistent and highly damaging campaign of defamation, harassment and misuse of private information”.
Threat of Property Action
In his latest statement, Vine revealed the lengths his legal team went to ensure payment: “To ensure he had the funds, I had to commission legal searches on his house. He owns it outright. Lawyers advised me that if he did not pay, they could put a charge on his house. This would mean Mr Barton would effectively become my tenant, paying me rent to live there.”
The broadcaster added that his lawyers could have forced the sale of the property if necessary, though this did not prove necessary as Barton has now paid in full.
Mixed Public Response
The feud has drawn widespread response online with many suggesting the broadcaster had gone too far with the case. One said: “Half a million in fees over that? Seriously?”
While another wrote: “Barton’s a d***, but Christ we need to change the law to stop this nonsense.
Others criticised both parties, with one user posting: “Elitists playing elitist games. People can’t pay their rent, utility bills, mortgages, for food… So completely out of touch.”
Some defended Vine’s right to protect his reputation, while others questioned whether the UK’s libel laws need reform to prevent such costly legal battles.
Background of Joey Barton
Barton, who played for teams including Manchester City, Newcastle United, Rangers, and French side Marseille during his career, has been known for his controversial statements on social media. The dispute with Vine began after Barton made comments criticising women’s involvement in men’s football commentary.
When Vine questioned whether Barton had a “brain injury” in response to these comments, it triggered the series of defamatory posts that led to the legal action.
Following the October hearing, Vine said that Barton “needs to find himself a different hobby”. Barton made four undertakings as part of the settlement, including not to harass Vine or encourage others to do so.
The case highlights the significant financial risks of making defamatory statements on social media, even for wealthy former footballers, and demonstrates the power of UK libel laws to protect individuals from false allegations.
Follow for more updates on Britannia Daily
