Ronaldo sued by cosmetic doctor over unpaid £40,000 bill
Cosmetic doctor Roshan Ravindran has filed a lawsuit against Cristiano Ronaldo, alleging that a bill of £40,000 remains unpaid for services rendered in 2021 and 2022. The claim has been brought in court, with court documents cited by The Sun as the source of the complaint. The case underscores how high‑profile athletes can face civil challenges over professional charges within their personal networks, and it reflects the growing intersection between celebrity wealth and medical billing in the United Kingdom and beyond. The Sun is the primary outlet referenced in the filing for details surrounding the dispute.
There is a trial going on right now. As a professional, I don’t talk about my patients,
The source describes Ravindran as accusing Ronaldo of not paying for cosmetic services provided in 2021 and 2022. Ronaldo had previously been with Manchester United. The statement of claim does not name Ronaldo’s wife, Georgina Rodriguez, but it notes that Ravindran worked for Ronaldo “and his family and circle,” a phrase that underscores the breadth of the services claimed and the personal connections involved. The Sun’s reporting ties the allegations to the ongoing civil proceedings.
On January 2, 2023, Ronaldo became a player for Al‑Nasr in Saudi Arabia under a contract reported to be worth €200 million per year. It was also claimed that Ronaldo and his family received additional bonuses as part of the arrangement. The move followed his departure from Manchester United amid tensions with head coach Erik ten Hag, a detail frequently referenced in coverage of the transfer as part of Ronaldo’s high‑profile career trajectory and financial footprint. The Sun’s reporting connects the timing of the alleged unpaid charges with Ronaldo’s international career moves.
Earlier, the report notes, Ronaldo had become famous as a Davis Cup champion, a detail cited within the context of the broader profile surrounding the case and the public interest in the star’s personal and professional history. Such notes illustrate how legal actions involving famous athletes often intersect with narratives about success, prestige, and the pressures that come with high visibility.
Legal experts explain that civil disputes over professional charges typically involve a review of invoices, service records, and any communications between the provider and the client. In cases like Ronaldo’s, the court may weigh the credibility of service descriptions, dates, and amounts claimed, as well as any documented refusals or delays in payment. While the outcome depends on the specifics of evidence and contract terms, these proceedings commonly lead to settlements, payment plans, or negotiated resolutions that can shield parties from extended litigation and protect reputational interests for both the clinic and the client. The case highlights how even global superstars can encounter routine financial disputes, and how those disputes are managed within the legal system alongside career obligations and public perception.
The dispute also brings attention to the broader issue of medical billing transparency when high‑profile clients are involved. Doctors and clinics must balance confidentiality with the need to document charges and services, while athletes and their entourages must manage expectations around payment, timing, and settlement possibilities. Observers note that settlements are not uncommon in such cases, and many parties pursue discreet arrangements or structured payments to avoid publicized disputes while maintaining professional relationships. The dynamics in Ronaldo’s case mirror the challenges that can arise when prestige intersects with practical financial obligations.
Ronaldo’s move to Al‑Nasr has amplified discussions about earnings, sponsorship opportunities, and tax considerations while legal matters of this nature unfold in parallel. Analysts suggest that the legal proceedings are unlikely to affect his playing schedule immediately, but they can have indirect effects on endorsements, brand partnerships, and the overall perception of his financial management. The case serves as a reminder that even at the pinnacle of sport, personal services and billing can become central to the narrative surrounding a star’s career and public image.
In summary, the ongoing case involving a £40,000 unpaid bill casts a spotlight on the friction that can arise between professional service providers and high‑profile clients. It demonstrates how civil procedures unfold in celebrity contexts, the kinds of evidence that courts scrutinize, and the potential routes to resolution that avoid extended litigation. The Sun continues to cover the matter as it develops, with the situation illustrating a broader reality: money, reputation, and legality often intersect in the lives of today’s top athletes.