Here's a reminder of the tweet that earned Coleen Rooney the nickname Wagatha Christie:

Image source, .

A key feature of the trial - one Coleen Rooney's barrister sarcastically labelled "a series of unfortunate events" - was the fact WhatsApp messages between Rebekah Vardy and her agent Caroline Watt were not available during the trial.

Watt later claimed she'd dropped her phone in the North Sea while on a boat trip in Scotland, while Vardy's team claimed at pre-trial that an IT expert tasked with securing the material had “forgotten the password which he used to encrypt the material”.

In her judgement, Mrs Justice Steyn says these reasons "are each improbable", adding:

Image source, Reuters

There is more detail from the judge about how she reached her decision.

Discussing the information that was shared from Rooney's private Instagram account, Mrs Justice Steyn said:

The Pyjamas post mentioned in the judgement refers to a picture of Rooney's husband Wayne in bed with three of his sons in spotted pyjamas, which Rooney shared on her private Instagram account.

The judge added that while two of the stories posted by Mrs Rooney were fabricated, "this does not detract from the conclusion that the essential sting of the libel has been shown to be true".

Image source, PA Media

Mrs Justice Steyn has found that Rebekah Vardy's evidence in the trial was "manifestly inconsistent" with other evidence on "many occasions".

In her judgement, she said: "It was evident that Mrs Vardy found the process of giving evidence stressful and, at times, distressing. I bear in mind when assessing her evidence the degree of stress she was naturally feeling, given the high-profile nature of the trial, the abuse that she has suffered since the reveal post was published, and the length of time she was in the witness box."

"Nevertheless," the judge continued, "I find that it is, unfortunately, necessary to treat Mrs Vardy's evidence with very considerable caution.

Mrs Justice Steyn continued: "Mrs Vardy was generally unwilling to make factual concessions, however implausible her evidence.

"This inevitably affects my overall view of her credibility, although I have borne in mind that untruthful evidence may be given to mask guilt or to fortify innocence."

Image source, PA Media

In her ruling, Mrs Justice Steyn said that Rebekah Vardy had faced "vile abuse" from members of the public following Coleen Rooney's post.

She said: "Some members of the public have responded to the reveal post by subjecting Mrs Vardy to vile abuse, including messages wishing her, her family, and even her then-unborn baby, ill in the most awful terms.

"Nothing of which Mrs Vardy has been accused, nor any of the findings in this judgment, provide any justification or excuse for subjecting her or her family, or any other person involved in this case, to such vitriol."

Image source, REUTERS/Hannah McKay

As we've just heard, Mrs Justice Steyn said in her ruling it was "likely" that Rebekah Vardy's agent Caroline Watt passed information to The Sun newspaper.

So what do we know about her?

You might not have heard her name before this case – she’s Vardy's friend and agent, who according to media reports, external began to manage Vardy in 2015.

Watt’s probably best known as the owner of a phone said to have fallen into the North Sea after a boat hit a wave, before Coleen Rooney's team could see WhatsApp messages that could potentially have been relevant to her case.

Rooney's lawyers have called this "a series of unfortunate events".

Watt hasn’t been able to given evidence at the trial after a consultant forensic psychiatrist decided she wasn’t fit to do so for medical reasons.

During the trial, Vardy appeared to concede that, in a WhatsApp message read to the court, her agent had admitted leaking a story from Rooney's private Instagram account about an alleged car crash.

After Rooney posted that someone she trusted was betraying her, Watt wrote to Vardy: "It wasn't someone she trusted. It was me."

Asked why she didn't challenge her agent about that, Vardy said she had been too distracted because she was bathing her children while watching Dancing On Ice.

Image source, PA Media

In her ruling, Mrs Justice Steyn said it was "likely" that Rebekah Vardy's then-agent, Caroline Watt, "undertook the direct act" of passing the information to tabloid newspaper The Sun.

"Nonetheless, the evidence... clearly shows, in my view, that Mrs Vardy knew of and condoned this behaviour, actively engaging in it by directing Ms Watt to the private Instagram account, sending her screenshots of Mrs Rooney's posts, drawing attention to items of potential interest to the press, and answering additional queries raised by the press via Ms Watt," she added.

Mrs Justice Steyn continued: "In my judgment, the conclusions that I have reached as to the extent to which the claimant engaged in disclosing to the Sun information to which she only had access as a permitted follower of an Instagram account which she knew, and Mrs Rooney repeatedly asserted, was private, suffice to show the single meaning is substantially true."

Image source, PA Media

Rebekah Vardy has lost her libel case against Coleen Rooney, bringing the so-called Wagatha Christie trial to an end, the PA news agency reports.

More updates to follow shortly.

Image source, Getty Images

We're expecting the long-awaited outcome of the Wagatha Christie trial in the next few minutes.

But regardless of the outcome, the legal costs for each side will be upwards of £1m.

Even the winner will only recover about 70% of their legal bill, leaving them with around £300,000 still to pay, says media lawyer, Jonathan Coad.

If any damages are awarded, they are only likely to be in the £15,000 to £40,000 range.

"It makes no sense for either of them," Coad adds. "Even the winner is going to come out with a massive loss."

Judges repeatedly pleaded for Vardy and Rooney to settle the matter out of court before the trial began in May, but neither side backed down.

Branding expert Chris Hunte, who runs the Addition agency, says the saga has been bad for both women professionally.

"Brands go into partnerships with celebrities to build consumer loyalty, ultimately increase sales and have a positive PR around associating with that person," he says.

"For both these ladies, the impact is huge, especially in the short run here. They could be losing hundreds of thousands of pounds alone, just from being involved in his case.”

There’s a lot of legal terminology being thrown around here – so let’s go through some of the basics in a trial like this.

Under English and Welsh law, a person can bring a defamation case against someone else when they feel a false statement has been made about them and it is damaging to their reputation. Defamation is split into two categories – libel, which means the statement is made in written form, and slander, which means it is spoken.

So in the case of Wagatha Christie, Rebekah Vardy sued Coleen Rooney for libel after Rooney published her infamous “It’s……..Rebekah Vardy’s account” tweet, external.

For a claimant (Vardy) to win their case, they have to prove:

• that the defendant (Rooney) has published a statement to at least one third party that identifies them
• that the statement is likely to cause others to think less of them
• that the statement has caused serious harm to their reputation, or is likely to

Vardy’s legal team must also defeat any defence raised by Rooney and her team.

On the other side, Rooney’s team have up to seven legal defences they can use – but the two most obvious in this case are either truth or honest opinion, as set out, external by the Leeds-based law firm Blacks.

Truth: Rooney has to prove that the statement she made is correct - ie that Vardy was undoubtedly responsible for leaking stories to The Sun newspaper. (And even though the tweet says "Rebekah Vardy's account" - not Rebekah Vardy - it was agreed in a pre-trial ruling that the natural inference from the post was that this meant Vardy herself was responsible).

Honest opinion: Rooney has to demonstrate that the statement outlined in her tweet was one of opinion, that this was indicated within the Twitter post and that an honest person could have held the same opinion on the basis of any fact which existed at the time the alleged defamatory statement was published.

Colin Paterson
BBC News correspondent

Image source, Press Association

We'll soon be finding out the judgement in the Vardy v Rooney libel trial.

There has been so much interest in this case that it has its own nickname (the Wagatha Christie trial), its own podcast series and Channel 4 have announced a two-part docudrama with actors playing Rebekah Vardy and Coleen Rooney, recreating the court scenes.

However, today at the High Court there are no photographers and no onlookers – a stark contrast to the crowds which arrived daily during the seven days of the trial in May.

That is because at midday the judgement will simply be released online on the Courts and Tribunals Judiciary website,, external which will certainly receive rather more traffic than usual. Rebekah Vardy and Coleen Rooney will not be at the High Court. No final outfit choices for people to analyse.

Coleen Rooney was photographed yesterday near her house in Cheshire. Rebekah Vardy’s last social media post four days ago showed a family scene by, what looked like, a swimming pool abroad. Their accounts will be closely monitored to see if they give any reaction today.

After all the months of interest, all the column inches written about this case, all the online discussion, the judgement is almost here.

Image source, Getty Images

Former magazine columnist and TV presenter Coleen Rooney is married to Wayne Rooney, England star and also a former player for Manchester United, Everton and others.

Rebekah Vardy, a former nightclub promoter and reality show contestant, is married to Jamie Vardy, who plays for Premier League club Leicester City.

Both Wayne and Jamie had also played together for the England football team, though Rooney told the court during the trial that she and Vardy were "not good friends".

The pair rose to tabloid fame as "Wags" - wives and girlfriends of the England footballers.

According to British journalist Elizabeth Paton - who has tried to explain all this to Americans, external in the pages of the New York Times - Rooney used her time as Wag to grow her celebrity status - reaching "peak Wag royalty" while Vardy is "a more recent addition to the fold".

The two were not "known enemies", Paton said, but this has obviously changed.

Image source, Getty Images

You might remember the social media post that rocked the pop culture world in 2019 when Coleen Rooney famously claimed that Rebekah Vardy’s Instagram account was leaking stories about her to the press.

"It's.............. Rebekah Vardy's account," Rooney wrote in the tweet heard round the world, complete with the cliff-hanger ellipses.

The episode earned her the nickname Wagatha Christie - a play on Wag and Agatha Christie, the English writer famed for her detective novels.

Well, the post that started it all off originated as a humble handwritten note, the court heard during the trial.

Rooney said she initially wrote the post longhand (she was seen scribbling in a leopard print notebook throughout the trial too) before typing it out and sending it to her brother, who helped publish it on her social media accounts.

The original note has sadly been lost.

We're expecting to hear the verdict of the libel trial in which Rebekah Vardy sued Coleen Rooney at midday.

After seven days of bruising evidence, the so-called Wagatha Christie trial wrapped up on 19 May.

Both parties have had to wait months to hear the outcome of the case, however, the legal costs could be far greater than any damages that might be awarded at the end.

The women have paid for and got the full gamut of English justice. Some have put the final costs of the case at up to £4m ($4.8m).

Image source, PA Media

Rebekah Vardy and Coleen Rooney rose to tabloid fame as "Wags" - wives and girlfriends of England footballers - but fell out spectacularly when this saga began some three years ago.

Rooney believed someone was leaking information about her to The Sun newspaper and embarked on some online detective work to deduce who she thought was responsible.

Over a series of months, she wrote made-up tales on her Instagram stories, restricted who could read them and waited to see if they would appear in The Sun. And sure enough they did.

Then, in October 2019, Rooney claimed in a tweet:, external "I blocked everyone from viewing my Instagram stories except one account," before delivering the pay-off: "It's………. Rebekah Vardy's account.”

It was that post that gave rise to the name "Wagatha Christie", coined by Twitter user Phoebe Roberts,, external who was a new mum scrolling on her phone when she saw Rooney's message.

Vardy strenuously denied leaking the stories, calling Rooney to protest her innocence and posting her defence on social media.

When no public apology came from Rooney, Vardy decided to sue her for libel, in June 2020.

Hello and welcome to live coverage of the judgement in the libel trial involving Coleen Rooney and Rebekah Vardy.

It’s become an infamous case, with an infamous nickname, pitting two celebrities who rose to fame as footballers’ wives against each other in the High Court.

We're expecting to hear who has won the "Wagatha Christie" case at about midday.

So, stay with us.