Footballer who claimed his career came to a "premature end" after unnecessary procedure has won a legal challenge against surgeon
A former Premier League footballer, Sylvan Ebanks-Blake, has won a court case against a leading surgeon, after he argued that an unnecessary procedure was to blame for his career coming to a "premature end".
The Ex-Wolves striker, broke his left leg against Birmingham City in 2013. He believed the damage was only to his ligament and he drove home, but an MRI scan revealed a fracture.
After seeing Professor James Calder, he underwent the recommended ankle surgery that led to further complications, which led to him leaving Wolves that year. Although Ebanks-Blake continued to play professional football, he had to drop down the divisions, before retiring prematurely in 2019.
Mr Ebanks-Blake claimed that during an arthroscopy operation, Professor Calder cleaned out the joint and removed some cartilage, which "gave rise to inflammation", and sped up the development of osteoarthritis in his ankle. Mr Ebanks-Blake stated Professor Calder failed to properly tell him the risks associated with the procedure.
At the hearing in July last year, Simeon Maskrey KC, representing Mr Ebanks-Blake, told the court: "The onset of symptoms and the development and acceleration of osteoarthritis brought the Claimant's footballing career to a premature end."
Professor Calder denied the claims, saying that the injuries were significant and it would have been negligent not to have performed the surgery. The surgeon said that if anything, the treatment prolonged the player's career, as he continued playing for a further six years before retiring in 2019.
On 18th December 2025 Mrs Justice Lambert handed down Judgment, stating "I am satisfied on balance that, but for the arthroscopy, the Claimant would have returned to his pre-accident pain-free state." Mr Ebanks-Blake had suffered a "modest acute ankle fracture only", and found the arthroscopy, contributed towards a decline in health.
"The removal of the scar tissue destabilised the joint by removing the cushioning and by altering the biomechanics of the joint leading to increased movement of the joint, increased instability and acceleration of degenerative change in the ankle joint."
She added: "Taking all of these factors into account, I am satisfied that the decision to undertake arthroscopy, and the other procedures, was neither reasonable nor logical."
The amount of damages to be paid will be assessed at a future quantum hearing where the court will assess the appropriate damages to be awarded. The quantum hearing will consider the financial and personal impact of the injury, including the loss of earnings and the long-term effects on Mr Ebanks-Blake’s quality of life.
Medical Negligence Claims
If you have received negligent treatment at the hands of a medical professional, please get in touch with our expert Medical Negligence team on 01924 387110 or request a call back here.