rundhvid

In reading the courts resume, I noticed that the plaintiff and the consumer agency had an IT-expert to review the phone—some modules new, some non-new—but all functionally new (basically no problem, no case)!
Though, in a legal sense, the unit had a reduced resale value (!)

I have no legal authority, but this seems to be the crux of the case—the interpretation of the law, specifically about the terms "new" and "value" etc.

As I read the court's resume, the IT-expert validated the unit as a on-standard replacement.

It also seems as Apple went to court without any legal justification—the law is not new nor is it rarely invoked—in short: the court decision can't/shouldn't come as a surprise!

As others have pointed out, this law protects the consumer.
But the government has failed to explain the law to us Danes, as most of us mistake the law as a 24 month insurance!
In reality the burden of proofing that a defect was present at the date of purchase, shifts from the seller to the consumer during the covered 24 months.

Nothing would be easier than label my fellow countryman as a jerk, hell bent on a crusade against big capitalism!
But I think we should acknowledge the greater good any court case provides: less doubt, more actual, public knowledge—sometimes a lesson to the big company, sometimes a reason to review the law and how it is interpreted and whether the practice follows the intentions behind the law?
—as the resume states, at present, there is no possibility to consider of the environmental aspects in the current law!