is there any good to come from this as a LAME and the ALAEA?
If they had not pushed this in the first place then they would of not had the judgement about it being unprotected action. Sometimes it is better to know when you are on the back foot. It's a rather comprehensive judgement in that the judge did go out on a limb to give them an extra chance as he considered it in the public interest. He then decided what happened was not.
It would seem the general protection clauses will give some support if people are diligent in carrying out the CA. This is a matter of public policy. But this case shows you can't sit on them on a known issues then bring it up when desired for no reason. You need to be diligent from day 1. If you do not act on it promptly but then do later it is considered that you are either (1) putting people in danger not carrying out your role or (2) believe otherwise but trying to cause issues.
The other important thing was also they could not show there was any culture of danger. The airline fixed the issues before placing the aircraft back and had supported rectifying the issue on an aircraft earlier
It turns on how the people acted not if they acted. Actions should of been done in a way to minimise damage (that does not mean you don't act on issues, just not in a manner which causes more damage than necessary). Especially durring times like those.