She doesn’t come across well in the article. It does sound like she may not have followed instructions properly, and not disclosed things to her medical team that she should have disclosed (medication she was taking). I can’t really see how she won, but obviously I haven’t heard all the evidence.
this made me raise an eyebrow:
In the witness box, Ms Foo told the judge that, when she signed up for the operation, she was shown a document setting out the potential complications which could result from going through with the radical procedure.
'It ran to six pages. It was like studying for your driving licence, except you are signing up for a guaranteed car crash,
Rather sounds like she is admitting she was warned about the potential risks of the surgery.