A lot of " disgusted" emotion here rather than realism.
The key to low cost operations,- and the low fares to customers which have enabled huge volumes of people to fly, or fly more often , than ever before,- has to the provision of a basic service at the lowest possible price. All additional services, including meals etc are , reasonably enough, charged extra.
In this case the passenger was allegedly paying a £ 10 fare,- a very different proposition to a full service carriers offerings. The provision of wheelchairs is expensive regardless of who is organising them and it is not unreasonable for this to be recharged to the passenger. The alternative is to use a full service carrier and pay the all inclusive fare which covers meals, wheelchairs, drinks, whatever. The passenger has the choice.
This type of UK Court decision and now EU legislation giving massive compensation for any kind of disruption, regardless of reason, weather included, indicates that the courts do not understand or support the principle of differential pricing for different products and will move to stifle price competition. The traditional carriers, LH, AF, BA etc benefit/ are protected ( surprise?) and the low costs, of whom they are terrified, and the customers lose.