Barristers representing Coleen Rooney and Rebekah Vardy have appeared in court after the latter lost her libel case against Wayne Rooney’s wife
Coleen Rooney and Rebekah Vardy’s lawyers have been back in court.
A bid for Rebekah to access more documents was labelled a “fishing expedition” and “an attempt to derail” the latest stage of the Wagatha Christie case against Coleen Rooney, the High Court has heard. The wife of Wayne Rooney went head to head in court as Rebekah launched a libel case against the Liverpudlian following her infamous tweet. In 2019, Coleen took to social media claiming that Rebekah’s Instagram account was responsible for leaking stories to the press, an allegation which she denies.
Lawyers for Mrs Vardy – the wife of Leicester City striker Jamie Vardy – are asking the court in London to order Mrs Rooney’s team to hand over “privileged” documents, and details about her claim for VAT. Mrs Vardy was ordered to pay 90% of Mrs Rooney’s costs – more than £1.8 million – after she lost the legal action in 2022.
Her lawyers are disputing the sum, and at a hearing on Tuesday applied for further information about retainers between the wife of former Manchester United striker Wayne Rooney and her solicitors. In written submissions, Robin Dunne, for Mrs Rooney, said that “despite the hyperbolic nature of the claimant’s argument, there is no genuine issue at all”.
He added: “The defendant is forced to conclude that this is yet another attempt by the claimant to conduct this assessment in a wholly disproportionate manner.” Mr Dunne also said: “The court is invited to extinguish this fishing expedition. There is no genuine issue and the VAT point has been clarified.
“The claimant’s application is misconceived, seeking orders which the court has no jurisdiction to make, but moreover is an attempt to derail this assessment. This will lead to yet more costs and delay, which is in neither parties’ interest.”
Jamie Carpenter KC, for Mrs Vardy, told the court that the situation over more than £300,000 in VAT is “murky, to say the least”, and that further disclosure is needed to know the VAT is properly claimed. In his written submissions, he said: “What has emerged gives rise to a number of further questions, which needed to be answered.”
Mr Carpenter added: “It is submitted that it is not an answer simply to say that all of the VAT has been repaid, though the evidence does not presently support that in any event, because it leaves open the question of whether it was properly reclaimed in the first place.”
He also said that these issues need to be cleared up now, adding: “Further, the amount of VAT which is in issue is a clear obstacle to settlement and the avoidance of a further hearing.” In a three-day hearing last October, lawyers for Mrs Vardy argued that the sum she is required to pay should be reduced due to what they said was “serious misconduct” by Mrs Rooney’s legal team, who allegedly “deliberately understated” her costs.
But the judge found that Mrs Rooney’s legal team had not committed wrongdoing. Senior Costs Judge Mark Whalan said he will give judgment at a later date. Coleen claimed she spent a total of £1,833,906.89 to go head-to-head with Rebekah. Jamie Carpenter KC, who represented Rebekah, claimed the astronomical cost includes a bill for one of Coleen’s legal team to stay at the lavish Nobu Hotel. The bill, according to Rebekah’s lawyer, included “substantial dinner and drinks charges as well as mini bar charges.” Mr Carpenter added that Coleen’s team used an unfair approach when adding up all the costs incurred during the trial.
Carpenter had accused Coleen of “deliberately deceiving” the court by underestimating the costs and time which was spent on the case. Vardy’s lawyer believed that she should not be made to pay £117,500 plus VAT for “expert fees” which was invoiced after the initial budget had been agreed in 2021.
Robin Dunne, for Rooney, said that “there has been no misconduct” and that it was “illogical to say that we misled anyone.” In a ruling in October, Senior Costs Judge Andrew Gordon-Saker found “on balance and, I have to say, only just”, that Mrs Rooney’s legal team had not committed wrongdoing, and therefore it was “not an appropriate case” to reduce the amount of money that Mrs Vardy should pay.
He said that while there was a “failure to be transparent”, it was not “sufficiently unreasonable or improper” to constitute misconduct. Coleen’s representative, Dunne, argued it was “outrageous” to accuse them of being dishonest and slammed Rebekah’s “deplorable conduct”, adding that the legal costs would have been lower if “she conducted this litigation appropriately.” The London hearing was told that Mrs Rooney’s claimed legal bill – £1,833,906.89 – was more than three times her “agreed costs budget of £540,779.07”, which Mr Carpenter said was “disproportionate”. He continued that the earlier “understatement” of some costs was “improper and unreasonable” and “involved knowingly misleading Mrs Vardy and the court”.
Mr Dunne said 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.
Like this story? For more of the latest showbiz news and gossip, follow Mirror Celebs onTikTok,Snapchat,Instagram,Twitter,Facebook,YouTubeandThreads.
