Vardy launches appeal bid against latest Rooney ruling

Rebekah Vardy has initiated an appeal against a recent court decision regarding the legal costs incurred by Coleen Rooney in their ongoing high-profile legal dispute, often dubbed the “Wagatha Christie” saga. This development follows a recent High Court ruling that mandated Vardy to pay 90% of Rooney’s legal costs.

The case returned to the High Court last month, where the legal teams for both women engaged in a three-day hearing centered on the costs claimed by Rooney. Vardy’s lawyers contended that the expenses, which had ballooned to nearly £1.8 million, should be significantly reduced. They alleged “serious misconduct” on the part of Rooney’s legal representatives, arguing that such behavior justified a reassessment of the costs awarded.

However, Senior Costs Judge Andrew Gordon-Saker ultimately ruled against Vardy’s claims, stating that, “on balance and, I have to say, only just,” he found no wrongdoing by Rooney’s legal team. As a result, he determined that it was “not an appropriate case” for a reduction in the costs that Vardy was required to pay.

Following this ruling, new court documents have revealed that Vardy has officially filed an appeal, with her legal team at Kingsley Napley confirming to the PA news agency that the appeal pertains specifically to the ruling on misconduct.

In response to Vardy’s appeal, BBC News has reached out to Rooney’s legal representatives for comment, but they have yet to provide a statement regarding the matter.

Vardy, married to Leicester City striker Jamie Vardy, faced a significant setback in the original “Wagatha Christie” court case in 2022. She had launched her legal action after Rooney publicly accused someone using Vardy’s Instagram account of leaking private information about her to the press. In the ensuing libel trial, Mrs. Justice Steyn ruled in July 2022 that Rooney’s allegation was “substantially true,” which led to the judge ordering Vardy to cover 90% of Rooney’s legal costs, including an immediate payment of £800,000.

During the previous hearing in London, it was revealed that Rooney’s claimed legal bill stood at £1,833,906.89, which was more than three times her initially agreed-upon costs budget of £540,779.07. Vardy’s counsel, Jamie Carpenter KC, argued that this disparity was “disproportionate” and indicative of misconduct.

Carpenter claimed that Rooney’s legal team had understated some costs to create an “apparent difference” that they could then use to challenge the costs claimed by Vardy. He characterized this approach as “knowingly misleading.”

In contrast, Rooney’s representative, Robin Dunne, denied any allegations of misconduct, stating that there was no evidence to suggest any wrongdoing. He argued that the claim for a reduction in costs was “misconceived,” adding that the budget was not intended to be an accurate or binding representation of her overall legal expenses.

Judge Gordon-Saker ultimately ruled that while there had been a “failure to be transparent,” it did not reach the threshold of being “sufficiently unreasonable or improper” to qualify as misconduct. He ordered Vardy to pay an additional £100,000 to Rooney, with the full amount owed to be determined in future proceedings.

The ongoing legal battle between Vardy and Rooney has garnered significant media attention, with both women being prominent figures in British football culture. The case has highlighted issues related to privacy, defamation, and the costs associated with high-stakes litigation in the public eye.

As the appeal process unfolds, it remains to be seen how the court will address Vardy’s claims and whether the previous rulings will be upheld or altered. The saga continues to capture public interest, with both parties firmly entrenched in their legal positions as they navigate the complexities of the British judicial system.