JEREMY Vine has revealed the huge sum former footballer Joey Barton has now paid for his legal costs after their libel battle.
TheBBC2 presenter, 60, had sued for libel and harassment over posts on X falsely” and a “paedo defender”.
He said the ex-Man 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.”
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 after being sued for defamation and harassment.
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.”
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.
Ahearing inearlier 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.
Suzanner Holmes, for Barton, said that the request was “excessive” and should be reduced.
But Vine’s representative Kevin Latham saidhad “repeatedly failed to engage in proper negotiation”.
The court ruled Barton should pay £43,172.20 to add to the £160,000.
Neither Barton norattended the hearing in London.
The feud has drawn a 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.”
