On 29 July, the court dismissed Vardy's claim on the basis that Rooney's statements were substantially true.

The case acquired its popular name, a portmanteau of WAG and the name of the whodunnit fiction writer Agatha Christie, because of the steps taken by Rooney to investigate the source of the leaks.

[4][5] Vardy responded to Rooney on Twitter, denying the claims and implying her Instagram account had been hacked.

[6] In June 2020, Vardy commenced action in the English High Court to sue Rooney for defamation.

[8] At a preliminary High Court hearing on 19 November 2020, Mr. Justice Warby found Rooney had used defamatory words about Vardy.

The judge Mrs. Justice Steyn allowed Vardy to use written summaries from these journalists as part of the case.

[20] Rooney alleged Vardy was the source of information for The Sun on Sunday's "Secret Wag" feature, an anonymous column that discussed the private lives of others.

Rooney's barrister at the subsequent costs hearing described Vardy's claim as "probably the most ill-advised legal action since Oscar Wilde put pen to writ.

[31] At a subsequent hearing, Mrs. Justice Steyn ordered Vardy to pay 90% of Rooney's costs, with the first instalment assessed at £800,000, to be paid by mid-November 2022.

[35] In a three day preliminary hearing the Judge found that Rooney's lawyers had not committed misconduct by filing a budget which had lower costs than were now being claimed.

[38] She told Kate McCann of TalkTV that the media coverage of the case had been sexist and misogynistic,[39] and she was later said to be experiencing panic attacks and post-traumatic stress as a result of the trial.

Lewis wrote that the trial represented "a clash between different ideas of celebrity", with Rooney guarding her privacy and Vardy "an avatar of a made-for-Instagram world, in which you are a fool if you do not monetise your personal life".

[48] A two-part TV documentary, Vardy vs Rooney: The Wagatha Trial, was aired in November 2022 on Discovery+.