Rebekah Vardy opted for sleek hair styles that showed her power dressing during the sensational Wagatha Christie trial while Coleen Rooney took a more relaxed approach and appeared as if she styled her own hair and done her own make-up.

The two WAGs have been battling it out at London‘s High Court in a dramatic libel trial, which has involved many salacious celebrity revelations and trendy fashion looks. 

They now await the verdict of Mrs Justice Steyn, after ever dramatic closing statements which saw Mrs Rooney’s lawyer accuse Mrs Vardy of lying under oath’, and giving ‘implausible’ evidence that ‘cannot be trusted’.

The explosive £3million battle marks the culmination of a bitter feud between the high-profile WAGS, and has seen them both opt for high glamour and an array of sleek hair and make-up looks.

While ‘relaxed warrior’ Coleen has opted for ‘busy mum’ hair styles and natural make-up, Rebekah has channelled A-list style, opting for styles favoured by Kate Middleton.

Laura Kay, Make Up Expert and Founder of Laura Kay London said that Coleen opted for natural glamour, while Rebekah was ‘much more planned out’.  

‘Coleen has cleverly decided to not focus on the fashion and instead has minimised her efforts,’ she told FEMAIL.

‘Apart from wearing some suits her overall look has been muted and more subdued. I don’t think Coleen wants to draw attention to herself.

‘Coleen looks almost make up free and she has done the minimal to get ready for her day in court. She has used a natural pink gloss on her lips and cheeks. 

‘I suspect she has used a BB cream to cover up any imperfections. 

‘Coleen has softly brushed her eye lids with a deep brown powder and has applied a flick of mascara for quickness.

‘Whereas Rebekah Vardy has used the opportunity as a high fashion show and each individual outfit has been carefully planned out. 

‘Rebekah’s appearance each day has made a powerful statement and she is definitely trying to convey a certain seriousness and side to her for the cameras and the court,’ she added 

‘Rebekah has shielded her eyes with oversized sunglasses on numerous days to hide her eyes.

‘This is very old Hollywood glamour which also reflects in many of her outfits looks. Her hair has been tucked out of the way in almost all of the looks to reveal her expressions, probably in court. 

‘She has a dewy complexion and focused on a natural lip. She has opted for a liquid highlighter on her cheekbones and temples as well as a bright peach blush to further enhance her features. 

‘On the occasions you can see Rebekah’s eyes, her brows have been tightly groomed and her eye lids have been brushed with a powered smokey eye shadow. Rebekah pouts her lips often and she has either opted for a matt or a high gloss lipstick.’

Rebekah has worn her dark tresses back in sleek buns through the week, only letting it down for the final day today.

While she mostly wore her hair with a split centre parting, on one occasion she opted for French plaits in a look similar to one worn by Amber Heard, who is defending herself in another high profile defamation trial on the other side of the Atlantic.

Today, the mother-of-five seemed to be inspired by Kate Middleton as she wore a polka-straight look and tucked her hair behind her ears.

Meanwhile, Coleen wore her mousy brown hair in loose ponytails and buns and half-up half-down looks, perhaps in a move to seem more approachable.

Throughout the trial, Coleen has opted for high street looks from Zara and The Kooples while Rebekah opted for full Duchess glamour in very expensive looks from designers loved by the Duchesses or Sussex and Cambridge.

And her hair and beauty has reflected her low-key style.

Opting for natural make-up, Coleen has sported a light layer of foundation with a lick of mascara and light lipgloss.

Meanwhile Rebekah has styled herself in traditional WAG glamour, opting for lashings of highlighter and bronzer with her severe hair styling.

Stylists told FEMAIL both Rebekah and Coleen had ‘used the power of fashion’ during the court case.

Celebrity stylist Hannah Eichler revealed: ‘While Rebekah has taken power dressing to a new level by wearing unattainable designs by the likes of Chanel and Alexander McQueen, Coleen has made an attempt to appeal to the more down to earth of us, by favouring high street brands such as Zara.’

Hannah said: ‘Both Rebekah Vardy and Coleen Rooney have used the power of fashion during their recent court case – their outfits are by no means accidents but carefully constructed ensembles which present a version of themselves they desire to be seen as.’

‘Rebekah and Coleen have been using different style codes to convey their values.

Rebekah opted for a slew of branded pieces, wearing designers beloved byK ate Middleton and Meghan Markle, and covered her eyes with over-sized designer sunglasses for the court appearances.

She wore a total of £16,600 over the course of the six day trial, donning a new designer outfit for every appearance.

Meanwhile Coleen opted for a more low key, but equally expensive, wardrobe, mixing high street pieces from brands like Zara and The Kooples with expensive Chanel handbags costing up to £4,000.

‘Psychologists state that clothes can stop being clothes and can be used as symbols of strength and defiance, which is particularly true to Rebekah’s sharp tailored looks. Rebekah wants to be seen to mean business, and to be taken seriously.’

‘By contrast, Coleen has purposefully kept to more of an approachable aesthetic – take her printed Zara dress that wouldn’t look out of place down the pub. 

‘Coleen wants approval of the public, and does this by means of appealing to the people we are. For many of us also own that current season Zara dress – or can own it!’

‘Where both Coleen and Rebekah have similarities is in the accessory department – both women have favoured luxe designer labels, but again this speaks to how we in ourselves would like to be seen.’

‘The designer accessory was so invented as a means of labels catching a new audience – a posh bag might appear on our Christmas list, but who can afford a designer dress?’

‘The accessory choices of both women is also carefully engineered – we might be lucky enough to get a designer bag for Christmas, but we’ll team with a Zara dress – just like Coleen who’s opted for posh bags and more casual flat shoes.

‘Rebekah however has gone high octane with sleek heels and sunglasses which shield her face, thereby avoiding eye contact.’

It comes as body language experts claimed Rebekah appeared like a ‘corporate nun’ going into court and wanted to be seen as a ‘hot shot lawyer’ rather than an ‘innocent victim’, while Coleen Rooney seemed like a ‘relaxed warrior’ who was ‘confident but ready to fight’.

Speaking to FEMAIL, body language expert Judi James said that the two women have taken substantially different approaches to the trial, despite both arriving with a ‘show of strength and steel’.

‘Both women arrived on day one performing what looked like a show of strength and steel,’ she said. 

‘Both used wide strides and an accelerated walk as they went past the press, with the messaging seeming to be about urgency and impatience to have their say rather than any aversion to being snapped.

‘Rebekah’s choice of ‘corporate nun’ chic styling has been an on-going theme, apart from her recent and rather sudden foray into sunshine yellow. 

‘Her severe, immaculate grooming suggests a sense of grim determination and resolve. 

‘In business it would imply a tough negotiator that you would tangle with at your peril. 

‘She seems to have tried to look more like a hotshot lawyer than a vulnerable victim.’.

Meanwhile, Judi suggest Coleen opted for a more relaxed approach, aiming for empathy while husband Wayne  – who was often seen carrying her bag – looked like he was assisting her in the fight. 

‘Coleen arrived looking emphatically independent and resilient,’ Judi went on. 

‘Part of her impression of strength came from the way Wayne was knocked partly off the pitch here, like a sheepish substitute that she had no need of.

‘Coleen walked apart from Wayne and sometimes in front of him, while he carried her large bag. ‘

It comes as celebrity lawyer David Sherborne claimed Mrs Vardy’s case had ‘disintegrated’ during the week-long trial in an eviscerating attack on the wife of Premier League footballer Jamie Vardy at the Royal Courts of Justice.

Mr Vardy also came in for criticism, with Mr Sherborne accusing him of not being willing to be called as a witness so he could avoid giving evidence under oath. Instead he gave a statement outside accusing Wayne Rooney of talking ‘nonsense’ about his wife.

Mrs Rooney’s bronzed barrister, who has also represented Meghan Markle, Johnny Depp, Kate Moss, Sir Paul McCartney and Sienna Miller, said: ‘It’s not lost on the court, I’m sure, that Mr Vardy was perfectly willing to give a statement not under oath but apparently not willing to provide one for the process of these proceedings.’ 

Mr Sherborne said that Mrs Vardy’s case had ‘almost entirely disintegrated’ over the course of the trial, which entered its seventh and final day today.

He added: ‘Anyone could be forgiven for wondering how on earth this case has been allowed to get this far. She [Coleen] finds herself at the end of a seven-day libel trial, and for what?’

Mr Sherborne said: ‘Mrs Vardy was a highly unreliable witness. Her evidence should be treated with the utmost caution. Its accuracy simply cannot be trusted. The contrast in the way Mrs Rooney gave evidence could not have been clearer.’

He said Coleen ‘had been honest’ while Rebekah’s ‘evidence was ‘ill-considered and lacking in candour’.’ He said Mrs Vardy’s memory had been ‘selective’ as she gave evidence.

Referring to the ‘disappearance’ of the WhatsApp messages between Rebekah and her agent and publicist Caroline Watt, central to the case, Mr Sherborne said her explanation that the loss happened during export to her solicitors was ‘impossible.’

The fact Ms Watt’s phone was ‘dropped in the North Sea’ during a trip to Scotland was ‘fishy enough’, Mr Sherborne said.

‘There is only one conclusion and that is that Mrs Vardy deleted the WhatsApp chat and it was a deliberate lie to cover up her wrongdoing. There is no other plausible explanation. The only conclusion the court can reach is that she deleted the WhatsApp chat and then lied under oath about it’, he told Mrs Justice Steyn.

Mrs Vardy, who left the courtroom with a laptop in hand about half an hour after the hearing started this morning and returned with a bottle of Lucozade an hour later, says she brought the case so she could clear her name and ‘establish her innocence and vindicate her reputation’ after Mrs Rooney accused her personally leaking false stories to The Sun in the now infamous Wagatha Christie Instagram post in October 2019.

‘The burden lies on us to establish on a balance of probabilities that the post is substantially true. It is what she [Coleen] believed at the time… and it is what she believes even more so now that we have got to the end of the case’, Mr Sherborne said.

Finishing his statement he said: ‘Mrs Rooney was right in what she said in her reveal post, and she still is’. Rebekah’s lawyer Hugh Tomlinson QC will give his final statement this afternoon.