The Vardy/Rooney case, does the judge just mull it over for a bit & then decide? Like a one-man jury?

[Mangojuic]

I'm not familiar with this type of case. Does the judge chat to other colleagues before she makes her decision? Or does she have to stay on her own & decide? Does she have to justify her decision or only announce it? Is there such a thing as a split decision or is it always black & white? Many thanks

It is a hell of a lot of money, but what could Rooney do? She has to defend herself. And apparently offered to settle 3 times.
God knows what Vardy was thinking - surely she must have realised that all the other things she said and did in the past would all be dredged up!

It was an appalling decision of Vardy to do this. She could have defended herself on tv shows, magazines and many people would have given her the benefit of the doubt. Now any reputation or credibility she ever had has been trashed.

On the missing evidence, I am not at all surprised to see that the judge concluded that Vardy deliberately deleted WhatsApp messages and that Watt deliberately dropped her phone in the sea. The fact that messages that helped Rooney survived simply shows that their attempt to get rid of incriminating evidence was incomplete.

No.

We don't know if they did. She may have simply ignored their advice.

So she (Vardy) has been proved in court to be a liar.
is there any fallout from that (I assume not other than the appalling reputational damage as this was not a criminal case).

@prh47bridge - hey I have just finished reading the judgement - it’s perfect (in my humble opinion!). Agree with everything Mrs Justice Steyn says - including re public interest! One very astute lady (unlike Ms Vardy!).

thanks for your insight too - very informative.

Vardy says she won't appeal but maintains the judge got it wrong. Given the evidence, I struggle to see how the judge could have arrived at any other conclusion. A lot of Vardy's evidence is simply not credible.

Other than Vardy having to pay Rooney's costs (which won't cover all Rooney's costs), no legal fallout.

The corks will be popping in the Rooney house tonight it’s not about the money
winning is priceless !.

I also agree with the judge.

I am pleased that nasty vindictive Vardy has been exposed!

Rooney lawyer on R2 now

Case not finished yet. Consequentials according to that lawyer. He said a lot but said nothing. For Vardy it was an expensive embarrassing disaster. For Rooney prob worth every penny.

I don't blame Coleen, but sick already of hearing about her £6million TV "revenge" as I don't see what on earth she has to offer other than talking about her sleuthing skills. Good mum? Probably but so what? Doormat wife? Most definitely.

As for her comments about the cost of the whole drama and the money would have been better spent "helping others", I fully expect her to give her six million to charity.

“I fully expect her to give her six million to charity.”

If only to rub it in for Vardy, giving it to charity will be even sweeter, when you have their wealth money doesn’t matter, you do what you enjoy.

I doubt she'll give it all to charity! Maybe some of it?
I did read that the Vardy's are selling their Portuguese villa which looks lovely and worth a few mil. Makes you wonder if it's all worth it ( that's what I'd be thinking , anyway )

apparently the costs are roughly 3
million and Rebekah Vardy will pick
up most of the costs. I've ready that they" Vardy's are worth about 12 million, so that's a big chunk of their wealth gone.
The Rooneys are worth over 150 million so
imagine jealousy has been a big
motivating factor in all this!

I'd be gutted myself to have to sell that villa to pay off court debts; it's a shame she didn't just settle it out of court ages ago and save the humiliation and maybe a lot of the costs of it all too.
The only winners are the lawyers and the Rooney's who will be celebrating. It's all very sad.

Yep, judge will read all of the documentary evidence out before her and will have been taking notes of the live oral evidence during the hearing which she will consult. May also re-listen to the recording of certain parts of the live evidence given. She will have formed an opinion on whose evidence she prefers having seen and heard from the witnesses - not something she would consult colleagues on and in fact if she did, that could be an appeal point

will then look at the legal authorities (judgments of other courts) on libel placed before her in the bundle and consult the parties skeleton arguments so makes a decision on what the law is, what the evidence is and applies the law to the evidence