Coleen Rooney steps out as legal battle with Rebekah Vardy will RETURN to High Court

Coleen Rooney was seen stepping out in Alderley Edge in Cheshire on Tuesday as her legal battle with Rebekah Vardy returns to the High Court.

The WAG, 34, covered up in a black hooded zip-up jacket while shopping for food at her local Waitrose supermarket.

Coleen offered Rebekah, 39, an ’11th hour peace deal’ last month to drop hands and pay their own legal fees outside of court, rather than facing each other in court.

Coleen accused Rebekah of leaking ‘false stories’ about her private life in October 2019 after carrying out a months-long sting operation which saw her dubbed Wagatha Christie.

Coleen’s offer stipulated that if Rebekah accepted her Instagram account was the source of leaked stories to the press, then she would accept Rebekah’s assurances that she personally knew nothing about the leaks. 

However it has now been revealed the latest round of Rebekah’s libel battle against Coleen for allegedly leaking stories to the media is set to be heard by the High Court.

Following the news, Coleen was seen doing her weekly shop at the supermarket wearing a khaki sweatshirt with a pair of black leggings.

The mother of five’s brunette locks were worn in a bouncy blown out style, while she appeared to go make-up free for the outing.  

In October 2019, the wife of former England star Wayne Rooney claimed fellow footballer’s wife Rebekah shared fake stories she had posted on her personal Instagram account with The Sun newspaper.

Coleen claimed she planted three stories about her travelling to Mexico to ‘see what this gender selection is all about’, returning to TV and the basement flooding in her new house.

She then wrote on Instagram and Twitter: ‘For a few years now someone who I trusted to follow me on my personal Instagram account has been consistently informing The Sun newspaper of my private posts and stories.

‘I have saved and screenshotted all the original stories which clearly show just one person has viewed them. It’s… Rebekah Vardy’s account.’

Rebekah, who is married to Leicester City striker Jamie Vardy, denies the accusations and is suing Coleen for damages for libel.

In January, the High Court ruled the post ‘clearly’ identified Rebekah as ‘being guilty of the serious and consistent breach of trust’ Coleen alleges.

The court heard both women had agreed for a ‘stay’ of the proceedings until February so there could be ‘one final attempt to resolve the matter without the need for a full trial’.

On Tuesday, another preliminary hearing will deal with the timetable to a possible trial and any disputes over the parties’ legal costs.

Rebekah sued Coleen last June, claiming she ‘suffered extreme distress, hurt, anxiety and embarrassment as a result of the publication of the post and the events which followed’.

In her written case against Coleen, Rebekah’s lawyers said the abuse she received made her ‘feel suicidal’, adding: ‘She suffered from severe panic attacks and anxiety which manifested in being scared to leave her house.’

Rebekah claimed her husband Jamie was targeted during football matches, with opposition fans chanting ‘your wife is a grass’ for up to five minutes at a time.

But Coleen’s lawyers said the post was ‘entirely legitimate and justified’ and referred to Rebekah’s ‘exceptionally close relationship’ with The Sun and some of its journalists.

Sources have repeatedly indicated that Coleen has always found the cost of litigation ‘grotesque’ in the current circumstances, believing the money could be better spent elsewhere.

That is why she repeatedly offered to settle – previously offering to ‘drop hands’ – a lawyers’ term meaning both sides pay their own legal costs – with each of the footballers’ wives also donating to charity.

It is understood the offer was made in correspondence from Coleen’s lawyers to the Vardy side before a failed mediation hearing between the two parties last month.  

Rebekah has rejected all Coleen’s offers, meaning that the libel action she brought against Coleen looks set to go to a full court hearing later this year.

The move cast doubt on the strength of Coleen’s case, as her side lost an intermediary ‘meanings hearing’ in November.

At that round of the case, the dispute was over the wording of Coleen’s social media post, which she put up for her 1.2 million Twitter followers and 885,000 Instagram followers to see last year.

Coleen named the culprit of the leaks as ‘Rebekah Vardy’s account’, and her lawyers argued that she hadn’t implied Rebekah herself was guilty – and instead the culprit could have been anyone with access to her Instagram account.

But Judge Mark Warby ruled against this, saying the post looked as though it was putting the blame solely on Vardy.

He ruled that Coleen’s post ‘clearly identified’ Rebekah as being ‘guilty of the serious and consistent breach of trust’.

The judge said an ordinary reader would not take the word ‘account’ to ‘indicate that she remains in doubt about who the wrongdoer was’.

Under the law of libel, that means the onus was now on Coleen’s side to prove that not only did the posts come from Rebekah’s account, but also that she was responsible.

As one legal observer put it: ‘If Coleen’s side are ready to accept that Rebekah wasn’t responsible for the posts, yet they’re still ready to continue the case, you begin to wonder what is the point of continuing?’ 

The hearing on Tuesday is due to start at 11.30am.