|When they heard about|
InsoSocks, the Kats knew
that something was afoot ...
Be that as it may, this Kat is not going to provide a plot-spoiler. For those who only want to know the outcome, the full text of the decision (which runs to a mere 89 paragraphs) can be read here. If you want an informed analysis, fellow Kat Eleonora is already working to provide it -- so keep watching this space, or at least one very close to it!
- the questions asked by the Belgian court were so difficult and intellectually taxing that the CJEU really needed all the time it could get in order to sort its answers out;
- the legal points made at the hearing stage were sufficiently novel and unexpected that the CJEU had to look afresh at its preliminary opinion;
- the case was so boring that the CJEU could scarcely face looking at it and left it till its supply of the not-quite-so-dull stuff like fishing quotas, farming subsidies, anti-dumping and staff disputes was exhausted;
- the issues seemed so familiar, since the CJEU has been sent rather a lot of fair compensation questions in the not-too-distant past, that the good judges of Luxembourg left the file to gather dust on the erroneous assumption that they had already dealt with it;
- every year an officer of the CJEU pulls the names of three cases out of a hat and decides to do a go-slow with them.