Coleen Rooney ‘never believed’ Wagatha Christie case should have gone to court

Mrs Justice Steyn gave Coleen Rooney her much-anticipated judgment in the trial on Friday.

Coleen Rooney has welcomed her victory in the “Wagatha Christie” High Court case brought by Rebekah Vardy but added that she “never believed it should have gone to court” and that “it was not a case I ever sought or wanted”.

In a social media post that went viral in October 2019, Mrs Rooney, 36, said she had carried out a months-long “sting operation” and accused Mrs Vardy, 40, of leaking “false stories” about her private life to the press.

The wife of former England footballer Wayne Rooney publicly claimed Mrs Vardy’s account was the source behind three stories in The S*n newspaper featuring fake details she had posted on her private Instagram stories.

Mrs Vardy, who is married to Leicester striker Jamie Vardy, denied leaking stories to the media and sued her fellow footballer’s wife for libel, while Mrs Rooney defended the claim on the basis that her post was “substantially true”.

In a much-anticipated ruling on Friday, Mrs Justice Steyn found in Mrs Rooney’s favour and dismissed the claim against her.

Following the judgment, Mrs Rooney said she was “pleased” with the ruling following a week-long trial in May.

She said: “It was not a case I ever sought or wanted. I never believed it should have gone to court at such expense in times of hardship for so many people when the money could have been far better spent helping others.

“Both before and after my social media posts in October 2019, I made every effort to avoid the need for such a drawn-out and public court case.

“All my attempts to do so were knocked back by Mrs Vardy.”

Mrs Rooney added that she had “no alternative” but to defend the claim “to end the repeated leaking of my private information to The Sn”.

She continued: “These leaks from my private Instagram account began in 2017. They continued for almost two years, intruding on my privacy and that of my family.

“Although I bear Mrs Vardy no ill-will, today’s judgment makes clear that I was right in what I said in my posts of October 2019.”

In her ruling, Mrs Justice Steyn said it was “likely” that Mrs Vardy’s agent at the time, Caroline Watt, “undertook the direct act” of passing the information to The Sun.

But she added: “Nonetheless, the evidence … clearly shows, in my view, that Mrs Vardy knew of and condoned this behaviour, actively engaging in it by directing Ms Watt to the private Instagram account, sending her screenshots of Mrs Rooney’s posts, drawing attention to items of potential interest to the press, and answering additional queries raised by the press via Ms Watt.”

During the trial, the two women each gave evidence, as did Mr Rooney, also 36, who played for Everton and Manchester United as well as England.

In her 76-page judgment, Mrs Justice Steyn said Mrs Vardy’s evidence was “manifestly inconsistent” with contemporaneous documentary evidence on “many occasions”.

She continued: “I bear in mind when assessing her evidence the degree of stress she was naturally feeling, given the high-profile nature of the trial, the abuse that she has suffered since the reveal post was published, and the length of time she was in the witness box.”

The judge added: “Nevertheless, I find that it is, unfortunately, necessary to treat Mrs Vardy’s evidence with very considerable caution.”

During the trial, Mrs Rooney’s barrister, David Sherborne, argued that Mrs Vardy had a “habitual and established practice” of leaking information about those she knew – through Ms Watt – to The Sun.

He said there were, in text message exchanges between Mrs Vardy and Ms Watt, examples of the pair discussing leaking other people’s private information.

Mrs Justice Steyn said in her ruling: “In my judgment, the conclusions that I have reached as to the extent to which the claimant engaged in disclosing to The Sun information to which she only had access as a permitted follower of an Instagram account which she knew, and Mrs Rooney repeatedly asserted, was private, suffice to show the single meaning is substantially true.”

In the first ruling in the case in November 2020, then-Mr Justice Warby found the viral post had “clearly identified” Mrs Vardy as being “guilty of the serious and consistent breach of trust”.

He also found that an ordinary reader would take the post as claiming Mrs Vardy had “regularly and frequently abused her status as a trusted follower of Ms Rooney’s personal Instagram account by secretly informing The Sun newspaper of Mrs Rooney’s private posts and stories”.

The libel battle came after Mrs Rooney publicly claimed that an account behind three fake stories in The Sun that she had posted on her personal Instagram account was Mrs Vardy’s.

The fake stories Mrs Rooney planted on her Instagram during the sting operation featured her travelling to Mexico for a “gender selection” procedure, her planning to return to TV, and the basement flooding at her home.

In the post on Instagram, Twitter and Facebook, she wrote: “I have saved and screenshotted all the original stories which clearly show just one person has viewed them. “It’s … Rebekah Vardy’s account.”

It is believed the total legal costs of the case will be in the region of £3 million, most of which will now be borne by Mrs Vardy.