Ibica Vardi To find out if she succeeded in getting Colleen Rooney’s defense in the defamation war to be a High court judge.
Mrs Rooney In October 2019, 35-year-old Vardy accused Mrs. Vardy, 39, of leaking “false stories” about her private life after months of “stinging surgery”. She was called “Wagatha Christie” .
The wife of former England star Wayne Rooney publicly claimed that the wife of her football player shared with the newspaper the false story she posted on her personal Instagram account, earning her the nickname “Vagatha Christie”.
Mrs. Vardy, who is married to Leicester City forward Jamie Vardy, denied the allegations and sued Mrs. Rooney for libel.
In the latest round of cases, Mrs. Vardy’s lawyer asked the High Court to dismiss part of Mrs. Rooney’s defense, including allegations that Mrs. Vardy was closely related to her. sun And she claimed but denied that she was the author of the “The Secret Wag” column.
Judge Steyn will deliver his verdict at 10:30 am on Wednesday.
At the June hearing, Hugh Tomlinson QC believed that these were “irrelevant or irrelevant” to the case, and the core question was whether Mrs. Vardy had leaked Mrs. Rooney’s Instagram posts.
Mr. Tomlinson stated in a written statement that most of the claims made by Mrs. Rooney’s lawyers were controversial and rejected.
He continued: “Even if it is determined that the claimant has a’particularly close relationship’ with The Sun, it gives her a positive report that she has a history of self-promotion or is a’secret swingman’, but it does not mean The plaintiff is likely to regularly inform the “Sun” of the defendant’s private posts.”
Mr. Tomlinson later emphasized that these two women have public images and their own relationships with the media.
He said: “What happened in this case is that the defendant has passed the plaintiff’s appearance in the newspaper and put two and two together to make seven.”
The move to abandon part of the defense was opposed by Mrs. Rooney. Her barrister David Sherborne believes that Mrs. Vardy’s “extraordinarily close relationship” with the Sun is said to be a key part of the case.
Mr. Sherborne stated in a written opinion that Mrs. Vardy has a “habitual practice” of providing private information to the press to promote or use her public image for economic use.
The barrister later claimed that Mrs. Vardy would receive a commission and revenue share for the stories provided to The Sun through the Front Row Partnership (a public relations agency where Mrs. Vardy is a client).
He also stated that the evidence showed that Mrs. Vardy was in a “very disturbing situation” and that requesting her to be thrown away was a tactical move because it would “destroy her case and embarrass her.”
Mrs. Vardy denies any knowledge or authorization to pass on private information.
She also filed a summary judgment on Mrs. Rooney’s claim that Mrs. Vardy had leaked to The Sun about her return to the TV show-a legal step that would allow part of the case to be resolved without trial.
