Today marks more than five years since the start of the Wagatha Christie case – the surreal, undeniably petty, yet irresistible legal soap opera that has captivated the nation all this time.
Few could have predicted a row that began with a single Instagram post could have metamorphosed into one of the 21st century’s most extraordinary celebrity sagas. And now, £1.8million in court fees later, it STILL rumbles on…
It was Rebekah Vardy who originally sued Coleen Rooney for libel over claims she had been leaking stories to the Press, but Coleen would go on to triumph over her bitter foe after a judge declared in 2022 that her claim was ‘substantially true’.
The ruling would not be the end of this modern version of Jarndyce v Jarndyce (the interminable legal case imagined by Charles Dickens) with a dispute over legal costs dubbed ‘WAG War II’ leading to Coleen netting another victory.
Here, MailOnline reviews the case from the start to the present… via all manner of bizarre and colourful revelations –
2019: The famous Instagram post
October 9 –
Coleen uses social media to accuse Rebekah of selling stories from her private Instagram account to the tabloids after mounting her own ‘Cluedo-style’ investigation.
Coleen says she spent five months attempting to work out who was sharing information about her and her family based on posts she had made on her personal social media page.
Coleen’s iconic social media post that launched the ‘Wagatha Christie’ saga
After sharing a series of ‘false’ stories and using a process of elimination, Coleen claims they were viewed by one Instagram account, belonging to Rebekah.
Rebekah, then pregnant with her fifth child, denies the allegations and says various people had access to her Instagram over the years.
She claims to be ‘so upset’ by Coleen’s accusation, later adding: ‘I thought she was my friend but she completely annihilated me.’
The public dispute makes headlines around the world, with the hashtag #WagathaChristie trending on Twitter.
October 10 –
Rebekah famously compared Coleen to a ‘pigeon’
Rebekah gives a blistering interview to the Daily Mail in which she denies Coleen’s bombshell claim and compares her to a ‘pigeon’.
Asked if they ever argue, Rebekah says: ‘That would be like arguing with a pigeon. You can tell it that you are right and it is wrong, but it’s still going to s*** in your hair.’
She also reveals a phone call she made to Coleen shortly after she shared her iconic Instagram post.
‘I said to her: “Coleen, what on earth have you done?”‘ Becky recalls.
‘It was not an easy phone call. She said to me: “I’m not pointing the finger” and I said: “You have just annihilated me in public and hung me out to dry. The whole world hates me!”
‘I thought she was my friend but she completely annihilated me. She said: “You know, I always really liked you, which makes it harder.”‘
Did the two women argue, I ask? Becky is careful not to explicitly denounce Coleen, but says: ‘That would be like arguing with a pigeon. You can tell it that you are right and it is wrong, but it’s still going to s*** in your hair.’
2020: Rebekah launches legal action
February 13 –
In a tearful appearance on ITV’s Loose Women, Rebekah says the stress of the dispute caused her to have severe anxiety attacks and she ‘ended up in hospital three times’.
In a tearful appearance on ITV’s Loose Women, Rebekah says the stress of the dispute caused her to have severe anxiety attacks and she ‘ended up in hospital three times’
Shortly afterwards, Coleen shares a defiant social media snap with sons Kit, four, and Cass, one, after their recent skiing holiday.
She then retweets a short statement, which says: ‘Coleen has nothing to add to what she has already said.
‘She remains confident in the legal process and sees no reason to take the numerous opportunities that have been offered to engage in further public debate on this matter.’
Shortly afterward Rebekah’s appearance on Loose Women, Coleen shares a defiant social media snap with sons Kit, four, and Cass, one, after their recent skiing holiday
A representative for Coleen then tweeted a statement, which she re-tweeted minutes later
June 23 –
It emerges that Rebekah has launched libel proceedings against Coleen.
Rebekah’s lawyers allege she ‘suffered extreme distress, hurt, anxiety and embarrassment as a result of the publication of the post and the events which followed’.
In response, Coleen’s lawyers say: “It is disappointing that Mrs Vardy has chosen to issue court proceedings.
Coleen feels that the time and money involved could be put to better use; her offer to meet face to face still stands.’
November 19 – 20 –
The libel battle has its first High Court hearing in London. A judge rules that Coleen’s October 2019 post ‘clearly identified’ Rebekah as being ‘guilty of the serious and consistent breach of trust’.
Mr Justice Warby concludes that the ‘natural and ordinary’ meaning of the posts was that Rebekah had ‘regularly and frequently abused her status as a trusted follower of Coleen’s personal Instagram account by secretly informing The Sun of Coleen’s private posts and stories’.
Coleen’s lawyer hits back with a strong statement, which reads: ‘Today’s ruling on the technical legal meaning of the post changes nothing.
‘Coleen’s defence to this misguided action was filed last month.
A court artist sketch of the first court hearing on November 19, which shows – left to right – Hugh Tomlinson QC, representing Rebekah, judge Mr Justice Warby and David Sherborne, representing Coleen
‘It sets out clearly the facts of her case, which remain the same irrespective of any decision on the meaning. The key issues of the case remain the three stories from Coleen’s private Instagram account published by The Sun and Rebekah’s relationship with the newspaper, including its ‘Secret Wag’ column.
‘Coleen is pleased the judge has ordered that Rebekah must file her reply to the defence, on oath, by no later than December 8. After three years of stress and anxiety about the leaks from her private social media account, Coleen is keen to see progress made on the real issues, beginning with what Rebekah has to tell the court.’
2022: The Wagatha trial
February 8 – 9, 2022 –
A series of explosive messages between Rebekah and her agent Caroline Watt – which Coleen’s lawyers allege were about her – are revealed at a preliminary court hearing.
The court is told Rebekah was not referring to Coleen when she called someone a ‘nasty b***h’ in one exchange with Ms Watt.
Coleen’s lawyers seek further information from the WhatsApp messages, but the court is told that Ms Watt’s phone fell into the North Sea after a boat she was on hit a wave, before further information could be extracted from it.
Coleen and Wayne leave their car outside the High Court on May 11
JANUARY 2019: Ms Vardy texts Miss Watt and is said to have described Coleen as a ‘nasty b****… I’ve taken a big dislike to her! She thinks she’s amazing…Would love to leak those stories’
FEBRUARY 2019: Ms Watt and Rebekah realise Coleen has unfollowed them on Instagram. In a series of messages, Rebekah, who is married to Leicester City striker Jamie, 35, is said to have described Coleen as a ‘nasty b****’ and a ‘c***’, while Ms Watt brands the wife of former Manchester United star Wayne Rooney as ‘trash’ and ‘up her own ar**’
OCTOBER 2019: The pair discuss their response to Coleen’s now infamous Wagatha Christie claims. The text messages are said to show Rebekah describing Mrs Rooney as a ‘b***’ and a ‘c***’
February 14 –
Coleen is refused permission to bring a High Court claim against Ms Watt for misuse of private information to be heard alongside the libel battle.
A High Court judge, Mrs Justice Steyn, says the bid was brought too late and previous opportunities to make the claim had not been taken.
April 13 –
Ms Watt is not fit to give oral evidence at the upcoming libel trial, the High Court is told as the case returns for another hearing.
The agent revokes permission for her witness statement to be used, and withdraws her waiver which would have allowed Sun journalists to say whether she was a source of the allegedly leaked stories.
April 29 –
Rebekah ‘appears to accept’ that her agent was the source of allegedly leaked stories, Coleen’s barrister David Sherborne tells the High Court.
He argues that a new witness statement submitted by Rebekah suggests Ms Watt was the source but Rebekah claims she ‘did not authorise or condone her’.
Rebekah’s lawyer Hugh Tomlinson says the statement did not contain ‘any change whatever in the pleaded case’, with her legal team having no communication with Ms Watt.
A scrum of media and other onlookers formed outside the High Court during each day of the trial
May 10 – 19 –
Rebekah and Coleen come face to face in court as the trial of their libel battle takes place at the Royal Courts of Justice in London before Mrs Justice Steyn.
Both women give evidence, as revelations from the case make daily headlines across the British press.
The most colourful (and shocking) moments include:
* Rebekah gets ‘honest’ in the witness box –
Tense exchanges see Sherborne accuse Rebekah of being dishonest under oath, announcing: ‘You’re making this up, aren’t you Mrs Vardy?’ The reason you can’t get your story straight is because you’re lying.’
Yet amid the heavy atmosphere there is one moment that elicits several chuckles as Rebekah starts an answer by saying: ‘If I’m honest…’
Sherborne was quick to jump in and say, ‘Well I’d much rather you’re honest because you’re standing in the witness box.’
* Peter Andre’s ‘chipolata’ –
Undoubtedly one of the most talked about moments in the case is the unexpected courtroom chatter about the size of Peter Andre’s genitalia – which the court had been compared to a ‘chipolata’.
Peter, 51, is dragged into the case when Coleen’s lawyer Sherborne, reads out excerpts of Rebekah’s 2004 News of the World article about him to demonstrate she has form for giving stories to the media.
Following an alleged one night stand in 2001, Rebekah sold her story to the tabloid, in which she was quoted saying: ‘When he pulled down his trousers I couldn’t believe it. It was like a miniature chipolata.’
When confronted about her crass comments in court, Rebekah claims she had been ‘misrepresented’ in the story and coerced to do the interview by an abusive ex-partner when she was just 22.
Undoubtedly one of the most talked about moments in the case was the unexpected courtroom chatter about the size of Peter Andre’s genitalia
* Rebekah’s 2018 bust-up with Sarah Harding –
Many are shocked to learn that Rebekah once got into a heated argument with singer Sarah Harding at the 2018 National Television Awards after the late Girls Aloud singer spotted her rifling through her handbag.
In her written statement, Coleen says she is ‘aware’ that Rebekah had ‘provided various pieces of ‘behind the scenes’ footage for The Sun’.
Coleen claims : ‘She also got in a spat with former Girls Aloud group member Sarah Harding during the 2018 event because Sarah apparently caught Becky taking photographs of the contents of Sarah’s handbag when Sarah had dropped it on the floor. Their dispute subsequently appeared in The Sun.’
* The mystery surrounding Davy Jones –
As Rebekah is grilled about the fate of her agent’s phone – which contained a series of messages allegedly relevant to the case – Rebekah asks the High Court ‘who’s Davy Jones?’ following a nautical reference by Coleen’s barrister.
The High Court bursts into laughter after the exchange.
As Rebekah is grilled about the fate of her agent’s phone – which contained a series of messages allegedly relevant to the case – Rebekah asks the High Court ‘who’s Davy Jones?’
‘We know that Ms Watt’s phone is now in Davy Jones’ Locker, don’t we, Mrs Vardy?’ Coleen’s barrister says. Rebekah then replies: ‘I’m sorry, I don’t know who Davy Jones is’.
The judge then has to describe the idiom, which refers to the legendary resting place of sailors who have drowned at sea.
* Gemma Collins’ unexpected cameo –
As the trial continues the High Court hears how Rebekah received a text from her agent, announcing ‘it was me’ after Coleen first publicly claimed that someone had been leaking stories from her private Instagram.
Rebekah agrees her agent ‘appeared to be the source’ of a news story on Coleen’s 2019 car crash that ended up in The Sun but is questioned by Coleen’s lawyer on why she did not challenge her.
She says it was because she had been ‘watching Dancing on Ice’ and was distracted by Gemma Collins’s infamous ‘faceplant’.
Rebekah was referring to the moment the celebrity tripped and fell face-first on the ice during one of the routines in the ITV show.
Gemma Collins’ infamous faceplant made an expected cameo in the trial
May 20 –
An agreed 313-page bundle of evidence is released including pictures from Coleen’s Instagram account and screenshots where Rebekah complained to her husband Jamie Vardy that she was being made a ‘scapegoat’ during Euro 2016.
July 29 –
Mrs Justice Steyn dismissed the claim, finding Coleen had proved that the meaning of the post was ‘substantially true’.
Immediately after the end of the case, sources close to Coleen vow she will fight to ensure Rebekah foots the entire legal bill racked up during the case.
October –
Judge orders Rebekah to pay 90% of her fellow WAG’s legal costs. The total bill is £1,833,906.89.
2023: Legal costs dispute heats up
June 18 –
Rebekah is said in newspaper reports to be ‘furious’ at the huge legal bill and claims it has been ‘inflated’.
The total is said to be substantially above the £500,000 which Coleen’s team is said to have originally budgeted for in court.
Coleen’s barrister David Sherborne (pictured) ‘charged total fees over the course of the proceedings of £497,850’, the High Court in London was told
2024: ‘Wag War Two’ reaches court
May 28 –
The case returns to court, nearly two years since the original hearing, as Coleen challenges parts of Rebekah’s £325,000 bill, of which she will have to pay 20 per cent.
Some of the costs related to bids made at a hearing in February 2022 for further documents and information from both sides, as well as Coleen’s bid to have legal action against Rebekah’s former agent heard alongside the libel claim.
October 7 –
The first of a series of hearings hears that Coleen was ‘knowingly misleading’ Rebekah by ‘deliberately’ understating her legal costs during their legal battle.
Jamie Carpenter KC, for Rebekah, tells the court in written submissions that while Coleen’s total legal bill came to more than £1.8 million, she had previously ‘deliberately understated’ some of her costs so she could ‘use the apparent difference in incurred costs thereby created, to attack the other party’s costs’.
In court, he says: ‘Even if acceptable to understate incurred costs, you have to say you have done that. ‘You cannot keep that to yourself and then try to gain an advantage to say the other side’s costs are outrageous. It was intended to mislead and it did mislead.’
Robin Dunne, for Coleen, says that the argument that the amount owed should be reduced was ‘misconceived’ and that the budget was ‘not designed to be an accurate or binding representation’ of her overall legal costs.
The court heard a dispute a decision by one of Coleen’s solicitors to stay at the Nobu Hotel in Portman Square
October 8 –
The court hears claims from Rebekah’s team that some of Coleen’s legal costs were ‘extraordinary’, including money for a lawyer staying at the five-star Nobu Hotel, incurring ‘substantial dinner and drinks charges as well as minibar charges’.
But Coleen’s barrister, Robin Dunne, says that one of Coleen’s solicitors only stayed at the hotel due to a problem with their original booking elsewhere.
He tells the 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.’
Mr Dunne says 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’.
Later, it emerges Coleen has inflicted another court defeat on Rebekah as the judge rules the £1.8million legal bill she landed on her arch enemy had been legitimately incurred.
In a ruling, Senior Costs Judge Andrew Gordon-Saker finds ‘on balance and, I have to say, only just’, that Coleen’s legal team had not committed wrongdoing, and therefore it was ‘not appropriate’ to reduce her legal bill.
Mr Gordon-Saker says that while there was a ‘failure to be transparent’, it was not ‘sufficiently unreasonable or improper’ to constitute misconduct.
Rebekah is told to pay an extra £100,000 within 21 days.
But that’s STILL not it…
Unknown date –
Barristers will make a line-by-line assessment of costs incurred in the case.
