Home UK Showbiz Coleen Rooney and Rebekah Vardy’s ‘Wagatha Christie’ libel trial enters London’s High...

Coleen Rooney and Rebekah Vardy’s ‘Wagatha Christie’ libel trial enters London’s High Court

The preliminary hearing is taking place today


Coleen Rooney and Rebekah Vardy’s high profile libel trial has entered London’s High Courts today.

Rebekah is suing her former pal for damages, after Coleen publicly accused Rebekah of selling fake stories about her.

Last year, the wife of Wayne Rooney claimed she planted false information on her private Instagram page and blocked everyone from her story – except Rebekah’s account.

The mother-of-four said stories about her basement flooding, returning to TV, and gender selection were only viewed by Rebekah’s account – and the false stories all made it into the press.

Coleen believed this was proof that the fellow WAG allegedly sold stories about her private life, but Rebekah has vehemently denied her claims.

Taking to Instagram at the time, Coleen wrote: “For a few years now someone who I trusted to follow me on my personal Instagram account has been consistently informing The Sun newspaper of my private posts and stories.

“I have saved and screenshotted all the original stories which clearly show just one person has viewed them.

“It’s ……………. Rebekah Vardy’s account,” she added.

Coleen’s original statement

While the WAGs were absent at the preliminary hearing today, their legal teams were present.

Rebekah’s barrister Hugh Tomlinson QC claimed Coleen’s posts were an “untrue and unjustified defamatory attack” which was “published and republished to millions of people”.


According to Press Association, Mr. Tomlinson told the court that the accusations “leaves the reasonable reader in no doubt that the defendant is accusing the claimant of consistently and repeatedly betraying her trust over several years.”

He added: “In fact, she did nothing wrong. Whatever leaks there were did not come from her.”


David Sherborne, who is representing Coleen, claimed that she conducted the “sting operation” to determine where the leaks of her information were coming from.


“The fact that these sting operation stories also then appeared in The Sun, after access to her private account was limited to just the @beckyvardy account, is the reason why the defendant published the post which is the subject of this claim.

“The impression the reader would take away would be the essential message, that it was Rebekah Vardy’s account that was the source of private stories about the defendant appearing in The Sun – not Rebekah Vardy herself.

“The impression the post gives the ordinary reader stops short of guilt.”


The court also heard Rebekah’s written statement about the aftermath of the ‘Wagatha Christie’ scandal, claiming she suffered severe anxiety attacks and insomnia, and was taken to hospital three times after the scandal erupted.


The court documents claim Rebekah felt “suicidal” while seven months pregnant, after suffering from “extreme distress, hurt, anxiety and embarrassment”.

The documents read: “The claimant reasonably believed that the defendant published the post in a calculated and deliberate manner that was designed to cause very serious harm and enormous distress.”


“The defendant did not contact the claimant prior to publication but published the post to millions of people without checking with the claimant whether the allegations were true or giving the claimant an opportunity to explain her position.

“As the defendant knew, the claimant was seven months pregnant and on holiday abroad with her family when the post was published.”

“The claimant’s distress has been justifiably heightened by the defendant’s conduct which she reasonably believed was malicious.”

“The claimant will rely upon . . . the reasonable belief that she has deliberately been made a scapegoat by the defendant for past ‘leaked’ stories that have been ­published about the defendant and her husband, in particular about their marriage, which have in fact come from the defendant’s friends, at times even with the defendant’s approval,” the lawsuit states.