'Wagatha Christie' heading for libel trial in autumn despite legal costs
Coleen Rooney and Rebekah Vardy’s “Wagatha Christie” libel battle is heading for a high-profile trial this autumn, despite a judge urging the pair to settle the case as soon as possible to reduce their “extraordinarily large” legal bills.
Vardy’s team told the high court they were budgeting for costs of £897,000 if the case goes to trial, a sum which was described by Rooney’s team as “grotesque”. Whichever individual loses the case faces having to pay the other person’s legal fees, potentially leaving them with a multimillion pound bill if damages are awarded.
The two women have been locked in the costly dispute since October 2019, when Rooney used an Instagram post to accuse Vardy of selling fake stories about her family to the Sun newspaper. Despite the rapidly escalating legal costs there is no sign of the case being settled before trial.
Rooney, the wife of former England captain Wayne, claimed to have identified the individual responsible for leaking a series of stories by slowly narrowing down the number of people able to view her social media account. Her Instagram post making the accusation about the person responsible ended with the now-infamous line: “I have saved and screenshotted all the original stories which clearly show just one person has viewed them. It’s .......... Rebekah Vardy’s account.”
Vardy, married to Leicester City footballer Jamie Vardy, has always strongly denied leaking the stories about Rooney and responded by launching libel proceedings against her former friend. Attempts at mediation have so far failed, with lawyers instead running up substantial bills as the case heads towards one of the highest-profile libel trials in recent times.
Rooney’s defence has been hurt by a court ruling last year that her original Instagram post contained allegations of duplicitous behaviour directly against Vardy.
This has left Rooney’s legal team with the difficult task of proving in court that it was Vardy herself – and not merely an individual with access lawyers say is irrelevant to the matter at hand.
Both sides intend to call expert witnesses to give evidence on “Instagram and how it operates” and offer guidance to the court on how posts can be made public or private and how followers are blocked on the platform.
Judge Roger Eastman, described both sides’ legal budgets as extraordinarily large and urged them to “reconsider them with a fine-tooth comb”.
Vardy’s barrister Sara Mansoori told the court that her client had suffered severe reputational damage as a result of Rooney’s allegations: “It has caused enormous distress to Vardy and led to her being targeted by hostile and abusive online messages, as well as causing extreme upset and anxiety to members of her family.
“It was necessary to take steps to seek to understand the allegations made by Rooney, which involved technical expertise, as well as to seek to resolve the dispute. Regrettably this was not possible and further costs have been incurred in pursuing the claim to this stage.”
A further hearing in the case is due in July, at which point arrangements could be made for a potential weeklong trial likely to take place several months later.