UKIP politician Caven Vines ordered to pay MPs £40,000 over claims in TV interview

UKIP politician Caven Vines ordered to pay MPs £40,000 over claims in TV interview

THE former leader of UKIP on Rotherham Council has been ordered to pay two of Rotherham’s Labour MPs £40,000 in damages for “false allegations” made live on a national news channel.

Caven Vines, who lost his seat on the council in last month’s elections, made the comments in an interview with Sky News presenter Kay Burley in January last year, during the run up to the general election.

Mr Vines said that John Healey and Sir Kevin Barron “knew what was going on” in relation to the child sexual exploitation scandal in the town.

Read on…

Former Rotherham councillor ordered to pay £80,000 in libel action compensation

Former Rotherham councillor Caven Vines has to pay £40,000 to two MPs after losing a libel case.

The former Ukip councillor, who lost his seat in Rawmarsh last month, was sued by Rotherham MPs Sir Kevin Barron and John Healey over remarks he made about them and the child sexual exploitation scandal in the town.

Sir Kevin, MP for Rother Valley and Mr Healey, who represents Wentworth and Dearne, took action over a live Sky News interview Mr Vines took part in last year.

Read on…

Ex-Ukip councillor ordered to pay £80,000 in damages to Rotherham MPs

Caven Vines reprimanded after falsely alleging Labour’s John Healey and Kevin Barron knew about child sexual exploitation scandal but had failed to act

The former leader of Ukip in Rotherham has been ordered to pay £80,000 in damages to two local Labour MPs for falsely alleging that they knew about the city’s child sexual exploitation scandal but failed to act.

Speaking to Sky News in January last year, Caven Vines, the former leader of Ukip on Rotherham council, claimed that the MP for Wentworth and Dearne, John Healey, and the MP for Rother Valley, Sir Kevin Barron, “knew what was going on”.

A ruling from the high court deemed Vines’s comments to have been defamatory and Mr Justice Warby awarded Barron and Healey £40,000 each in damages on Wednesday. He said the ruling “strikes an appropriate balance between the need to vindicate the claimants’ reputation and compensate them fairly for the harm done, and the need to avoid overchilling freedom of speech in the political arena”.

Read on…

Rotherham MPs win libel damages over child abuse remarks

An ex-UKIP councillor has been ordered to pay £80,000 in damages to two Labour MPs over remarks he made about the Rotherham’s child abuse scandal.

Caven Vines claimed during an interview in January 2015 the MPs knew about the abuse but did not intervene.

MPs Sir Kevin Barron and John Healey were awarded £40,000 each in libel damages at the High Court in London.

Mr Justice Warby said the “offensive and wrong” allegation had caused “real anger and distress”.

Lawyers for the MPs said the allegation was “extremely grave” and could not have been more serious for politicians serving constituencies in the town, ahead of the General Election.

Read on…

Former Ukip councillor ordered to pay £80,000 in libel damages to Labour MPs

Caven Vines, his party’s former leader on Rotherham Borough Council, claimed John Healey and Sir Kevin Barron had known about child abuse in the area before it was exposed.

The two said in a statement that legal action had been needed because Mr Vines “refused to apologise or admit his allegations… which were totally untrue”.

Read on…

MPs win £40,000 libel pay-out from Ukip politician over Rotherham abuse claims

Two Rotherham Labour MPs have each won £40,000 in their libel action against a Ukip politician about remarks he made about the town’s child sexual exploitation scandal .

Sir Kevin Barron, MP for Rother Valley and John Healey, who represents Wentworth and Dearne, sued Caven Vines, who was Ukip’s leader on Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council, over a live Sky News interview in January 2015.

Last year, Mr Justice Warby entered judgment against Mr Vines after concluding he had failed to put forward any defence which could possibly succeed.

At London’s High Court on Wednesday, the judge said that the “offensive and wrong” allegation that the MPs knew for years most of what was going on by way of large-scale sexual abuse – and let it go on despite such knowledge – had caused them “real anger and distress”.

Read on…

14 thoughts on “UKIP politician Caven Vines ordered to pay MPs £40,000 over claims in TV interview

  1. I am sure Mr Justice Warby has come to the correct decision in the high court. Looks like Vines will have to stand for election somewhere to pay his debts or he could ask RMBC for a crisis loan. Anyway justice has been done beyond reasonable doubt.GUILTY.


    • Guilty he stated as fact something he could not prove in law. In order to protect himself he only needed to preface his remarks by saying, ‘I am told that…’, or ‘I have heard that…’ and there would have been no case to answer.
      The guilty verdict should be seen as a Pyrrhic victory.


  2. Shame they weren’t so vigorous in pursuing justice for the victims of CSE, I wonder if any of them will be paid 40k in damages from the courts?

    It clearly must have been about money, they couldn’t just claim the moral victory. I’m disgusted.


  3. I put my head above the parapet and I paid the price any opposition in Rotherham has been distroyed well done labour voters


    • Nonsense.

      Not for the first time, you made assertions as ‘fact’ when, in truth, you had not the slightest bit of evidence to back them up. Of course, as your political career to date has demonstrated, it is often possible to get away with this sort of behaviour without penalty. However, when such un-evidenced assertions are defamatory, designed to damage the character of individuals in pursuit of personal political advantage then, occasionally, the chickens come home to roost.

      I’m not bothered which political party (or none) you represent, if you behave recklessly and without care for the facts and the truth, you should expect to get your comeuppance. That sort of conduct only damages democracy. [In my businesses, if I made untruthful, damaging statements about my competitors’ products – with the intention that I would get the business and they wouldn’t – I would expect to pay big damages. This is no different.]

      When I suggested previously that the conduct of your defence demonstrated the greatest incompetence, you and your supporters sought to rubbish me and my analysis. Any independent reader of the judgements and the judges’ comments could hardly fail to reach the conclusion that your approach lacked insight, perspective and competence. You had every opportunity to mitigate the damage (as evidenced in the damages’ and costs’ rulings) but failed to do so.

      I am normally generous when people find themselves in difficult circumstances. However, I have to admit to feeling no sympathy for your plight, although I do have some for your family who, no doubt, will suffer from your intransigence.

      I hope you have some luck in persuading one of UKIP’s many multi-millionaires to assist you in your financial plight.


  4. Your head has an almighty big mouth and a very small brain, I would say Rotherham now has a better chance of quality opposition without the likes of you no longer making poor decisions on UKIPs behalf.


Leave your comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.