Rebekah Vardy agrees to pay £1.2m of Coleen Rooney legal costs in libel case

TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:

"Rebekah Vardy to Pay £1.2 Million in Coleen Rooney Legal Costs Amid Ongoing Dispute"

Rebekah Vardy agrees to pay £1.2m of Coleen Rooney legal costs in libel case analysis cover image The Guardian 7.3
Image Source: https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/773f6cbdadc8f55bd1b434a40aae5d5c4ba09f83/0_514_2908_1744/master/2908.jpg?width=1200&height=630&quality=85&auto=format&fit=crop&overlay-align=bottom%2Cleft&overlay-width=100p&overlay-base64=L2ltZy9zdGF0aWMvb3ZlcmxheXMvdGctZGVmYXVsdC5wbmc&enable=upscale&s=44acbcae9a03234f4e402145f90f34a8
Original Article Source: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/may/06/rebekah-vardy-coleen-rooney-legal-fees-wagatha-christie-libel-case
View Raw Article Source (External Link)
Raw Article Publish Date:
AI Analysis Average Score: 7.3
These scores (0-10 scale) are generated by Truthlens AI's analysis, assessing the article's objectivity, accuracy, and transparency. Higher scores indicate better alignment with journalistic standards. Hover over chart points for metric details.

TruthLens AI Summary

The legal dispute between Coleen Rooney and Rebekah Vardy, known as the 'Wagatha Christie' case, has moved closer to resolution as Vardy has agreed to pay approximately £1.2 million of Rooney’s legal fees. This decision comes after Rooney accused Vardy of leaking her private information to the press in 2019, leading to a significant legal battle that resulted in a judge ruling that Rooney's claim was 'substantially true'. Rooney's total legal costs amounted to over £1.8 million, but in recent court submissions, Vardy's barrister indicated that the agreed settlement for these costs is £1,190,000, which includes both the base amount and accrued interest. However, the case is not entirely concluded, as Vardy continues to contest an additional £300,000 in legal costs that Rooney claims are owed.

During a recent court hearing, Vardy’s legal team argued that Rooney's legal bill included excessive charges, labeling it a 'kitchen sink' approach that encompassed costs for unnecessary expenses, including a hotel stay at the Nobu, which incurred substantial charges. In response, Rooney's lawyer clarified that the Nobu stay was not initially booked by their side, and the solicitor had opted for a more modest hotel due to issues with amenities. The parties have reportedly reached a commercial agreement regarding the majority of the costs, leaving only the assessment of the remaining costs to be finalized. This will be determined in a future hearing with costs judge Mark Whalan, who expressed satisfaction with the progress made between the two parties. Notably, neither Vardy nor Rooney were present at this latest remote hearing.

TruthLens AI Analysis

The legal dispute between Coleen Rooney and Rebekah Vardy has captured significant media attention, and the latest developments indicate a potential resolution, albeit with some lingering financial disagreements. This article highlights the ongoing complexities of the case and the implications it has for both parties involved.

Financial Details of the Case

Vardy's agreement to pay nearly £1.2 million of Rooney’s legal costs is a significant step towards resolving the feud. However, Vardy's resistance to pay an additional £300,000 indicates that the matter is not entirely settled. The reported total legal bill of over £1.8 million by Rooney underscores the extensive financial burden that comes with high-profile libel cases, especially in the context of public figures.

Claims and Counterclaims

The back-and-forth regarding legal costs includes specific allegations about unreasonable expenses, such as luxurious hotel stays. Vardy’s barrister describes Rooney’s legal costs as inflated, while Rooney’s legal team counters that certain expenses were necessary due to unexpected circumstances. This aspect of the case highlights the contentious nature of legal disputes, particularly when reputations and public images are at stake.

Public Perception and Media Narrative

The article serves to inform the public about the ongoing legal battle and the financial implications for both parties. It may also influence public perception of Vardy, as the portrayal of her as resisting payment could lead to negative sentiment. By framing the narrative around the lavish spending versus essential legal representation, the article plays into the ongoing public fascination with celebrity culture and legal dramas.

Potential Manipulation and Media Strategy

There is a possibility that the way the story is framed aims to elicit sympathy for Rooney while painting Vardy in a less favorable light. The focus on specific expenses, like the "kitchen sink" approach to legal costs, may serve to emphasize the differences in how each party is handling the financial fallout. This can shape public opinion, potentially leading to a bias against Vardy.

Impact on Society and Economy

While the direct economic impact of this case on broader markets may be limited, the case reflects societal interests in celebrity culture and the legal system. The public's engagement with such high-profile cases can influence the media landscape and consumer behavior, particularly among fans of the individuals involved.

Community Response and Audience Engagement

This article likely appeals to audiences interested in celebrity news, legal drama, and social media controversies. It reflects the societal fascination with the lives of public figures, particularly in the UK, where both Rooney and Vardy have substantial followings.

Broader Implications for Market Dynamics

Although this specific legal case may not have direct implications for stock markets or economic indicators, it highlights the financial aspects of celebrity culture, which can influence industries such as entertainment, public relations, and media. Companies associated with either party may need to navigate public sentiment carefully.

Relevance to Current Events

This case reflects broader societal themes, such as the intersection of fame, privacy, and legal rights in the digital age. As discussions about privacy and media ethics continue to evolve, this case serves as a relevant example of ongoing debates.

The reliability of this article hinges on the factual reporting of the legal proceedings and the statements from both parties' representatives. However, the framing of the story and the selective focus on certain details may suggest an element of manipulation, aimed at shaping public perception rather than providing an unbiased account of the situation.

Unanalyzed Article Content

Source URL: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/may/06/rebekah-vardy-coleen-rooney-legal-fees-wagatha-christie-libel-case

The long-running legal feud betweenColeen Rooneyand Rebekah Vardy has inched closer to its end, with Vardy agreeing to pay almost £1.2m of Rooney’s legal costs.

But the high-profile Wagatha Christie libel battle is not yet finished, a judge has been told, with Vardy still resisting payment of a further £300,000.

Rooney, the wife of the formerEnglandstriker Wayne Rooney, claimed to have run up a legal bill totalling more than £1.8m after she accused Vardy, the wife of the striker Jamie Vardy, of leaking her private information to the press on social media in 2019. A judge found the claim was “substantially true”.

In written submissions for a hearing on Tuesday, Vardy’s barrister, Juliet Wells, said that Rooney’s total legal bill of £1,833,906.89 “has now been settled at £1,190,000, being c £1,125,000 plus interest of c £65,000”.

This week’s hearing had been expected to last nine days after Jamie Carpenter KC, for Vardy, said in a written submission that the bill had “a ‘kitchen sink’ approach” and included “over £120,000 of costs to which Mrs Rooney has no entitlement”.

He said this included costs for a lawyer staying “at the Nobu hotel, incurring substantial dinner and drinks charges as well as minibar charges”.

Robin Dunne, for Rooney, said in court: “[The solicitor] did not book the Nobu hotel. He booked a modest hotel but on the first night of staying there did not have any working wifi or shower.

“He was offered to stay at the Nobu by the defendant’s agent, who has a preferential rate.”

Dunne said that the food and minibar tab ran up to £225 but said the minibar tab “ran to £7, and ran to two bottles of water”.

In written submissions, he said: “It sits ill in Mrs Vardy’s mouth to now claim that Mrs Rooney’s costs, a great deal of which were caused directly by her conduct, are unreasonable.”

The two sides have now come to a “commercial agreement”, leaving just Rooney’s claim for “assessment costs” to be decided. Wells has said these costs should be capped at “no more than £100,000”.

The full amount of the assessment costs will be determined at the hearing before the costs judge Mark Whalan, who said he was “pleased” that the two sides had come to a “commercial accommodation” on the main sum.

Neither Vardy nor Rooney attended the remote hearing.

Back to Home
Source: The Guardian