Rebekah Vardy, 42, agrees to pay Coleen Rooney, 39, huge six-figure sum in legal costs after Wagatha Christie libel battle
Rebekah Vardy has agreed to pay almost £1.2 million of Coleen Rooney’s legal costs following their high-profile “Wagatha Christie” libel battle, a judge has been told.
The settlement includes £1,125,000 plus interest of £65,000, nearly six years after their public feud began in 2019.
A specialist costs court previously heard that Rooney ran up a legal bill totalling more than £1.8 million after successfully defending Vardy’s High Court claim in 2022.
The development almost brings an end to the six-year saga, which began when Rooney revealed Vardy was leaking stories to the press.
Neither Vardy nor Rooney attended Tuesday’s remote hearing before Costs Judge Mark Whalan, who said he was “pleased” that the two sides had come to a “commercial accommodation”.
The row erupted back in October 2019 when Rooney turned detective and accused Vardy of sharing stories from her personal Instagram account.
In her infamous post, Rooney revealed she had carried out a months-long “sting operation” after suspecting someone was leaking her private information to the press.
She had posted a string of false stories via her Instagram account with restricted access to see if they appeared in the media, which they did.
These fake stories included claims she was travelling to Mexico for gender selection, planning to return to TV, and dealing with a basement flood at her home.
Rooney then dramatically concluded: “It’s… Rebekah Vardy’s account.”
LATEST DEVELOPMENTS:
Giovanni Pernice, 34, issues statement against ‘those who turned their backs’ amid Abbington rowAmanda Owen, 50, fans demand answers after ‘disturbing’ son Reuben Owen, 21, update: ‘Explain!’Rihanna, 37, announces third pregnancy with partner A$AP Rocky as she debuts baby bump at Met Gala
Vardy, 42, strongly denied the allegations, suggesting her Instagram account had been hacked, and subsequently launched a defamation case against Rooney. The wife of Leicester striker Jamie Vardy claimed the viral accusation had damaged her reputation.
In July 2022, Mrs Justice Steyn ruled in Rooney’s favour, finding it was “likely” that Vardy’s agent, Caroline Watt, had passed information to The Sun. The judge determined that Vardy “knew of, condoned and was actively engaged” in leaks to the media by her agent.
Mrs Justice Steyn branded Vardy’s evidence as “manifestly inconsistent” while praising Rooney as an “honest and reliable” witness. The judge also found that Vardy had deliberately destroyed evidence to cover up her actions.
Following the ruling, Vardy was ordered to pay 90 per cent of Rooney’s legal costs. Her reputation and finances were left in tatters after the savage ruling.
At a preliminary High Court hearing in November 2020, Mr Justice Warby had initially found that Rooney had used defamatory words about Vardy.
However, the final judgment concluded Rooney’s accusations were “substantially true”.
Vardy had initially faced legal costs of approximately £3 million before being ordered to pay 90 percent of Rooney’s costs.
Jamie Vardy’s wife repeatedly tried to slash Rooney’s costs, which were put at £1,833,906.89.
In October last year, Vardy’s barristers claimed Rooney and her legal representatives had committed “serious misconduct” by understating some costs. Her lawyer argued Rooney’s team had adopted a “kitchen sink approach” when calculating the total.
He also claimed the bill included costs for one of Rooney’s team to stay at the five-star Nobu Hotel, with “substantial dinner and drinks charges as well as mini bar charges”.
Vardy later appealed the decision, but Mr Justice Cavanagh dismissed it in April, saying: “The appeal must fail on the basis that the judge was entitled to reach the conclusion that he came to.”
Senior Costs Judge Andrew Gordon-Saker found there was a “failure to be transparent” but it was not “sufficiently unreasonable or improper” to constitute misconduct.
In written submissions for Tuesday’s hearing, Vardy’s barrister Juliet Wells said Rooney is now claiming additional “assessment costs” of more than £300,000.
Ms Wells described these costs as “grossly disproportionate” and argued they should be capped at “no more than £100,000”.
She claimed Vardy had “gone to significant lengths to negotiate the bill despite being hamstrung by a lack of information and cooperation from Mrs Rooney’s camp”.
Robin Dunne, representing Rooney, countered that Vardy was “the author of her own misfortune”.
He said: “She took every conceivable point in this assessment, put Mrs Rooney to very significant work on each and every aspect of the proceedings.”
The full amount of the assessment costs will be determined at the hearing before Costs Judge Mark Whalan.
Mr Dunne added that if Vardy “wishes that the sum claimed were lower, she need only reflect upon her approach and conduct throughout”.