Not like it's their money

The Bloated Broadcasting Corporation has decided that it's going to carry on fighting the ex Top gear test driver (aka the Stig) for revealing to the world who he is.

BBC.

THE BBC is to press ahead and sue Top Gear’s The Stig despite facing a £200,000 legal bill after a judge yesterday refused to block the racing driver’s best-selling book.

Mr Justice Morgan Court refused to grant BBC bosses an ­injunction against Ben Collins’ autobiography because he said his identity as The Stig was now common knowledge.

Collins was sacked by the corporation who claimed his decision to write a book – and finally reveal his identity – would be a breach of contract.

But in the High Court, the judge said: “The fact that Mr Collins was The Stig was so ­generally accessible, the ­information had lost its confidential character.

“I do not see how any further harm will be caused to the BBC if Mr Collins is allowed to ­publish his autobiography in time for the 2010 Christmas market.”

Mr Collins’ book, The Man In The White Suit, is already a best-seller.

If the case goes to trial, it could ­triple the potential legal costs, already running at around £200,000, for the BBC and licence fee-payers.

A corporation spokeswoman said: “The BBC will always fight to protect its programmes and characters.”

The 35-year-old Bristol-based stunt driver has already been replaced and a new Stig has been chosen for the next series of Top Gear.

It would be different if the BBC was a private organisation, however they've decided to use my (and yours if you're a license payer) cash to sue Ben Collins despite the fact that we all know who he is now (and no I was never bothered about who the Stig was either) They've already racked up legal fees to the sum of £200,000 and intend to take it further, mostly because it's not their money they are playing with as far as I can tell. Whilst breach of contract is a fairly serious thing, in this case though, nothing was stolen, no trade secrets handed over, Collins simply decided to reveal who he was, a sack-able breach of contract, but not worth suing him over. They just needed to replace him with another mystery driver, not cost the license payer a whopping sum of money. A clear case that when it comes to the public's money, they don't care how much it costs, because it never affect them personally.

Now if the legal costs of losing a case came out of their wages/pensions/bonuses...