It is hard to describe a day on which one of the State's leading businessmen is found guilty of insider trading as a good one. But in the round the Supreme Court's ruling that Jim Flavin, the executive chairman of DCC had insider information when he orchestrated the sale of DCC's stake in Fyffes is welcome.
Any other outcome would have amounted to official sanction for the culture of breathtaking cynicism and moral ambiguity existing in the highest levels of Irish business which was exposed during this mammoth court battle that has taken five years to reach its conclusion.
The original court case - which was the subject of the appeal judgment given yesterday - scrutinised the inner working of two of the State's most respected companies. The result was far from flattering for either DCC or Fyffes. As yesterday's judgment confirmed DCC operated in a fashion that, while on the face of it was completely legal, amounted to insider trading.
Equally, Fyffes was shown to have played fast and loose with the requirement for companies to disclose information to shareholders. And indeed its motivation for bringing its case against DCC appeared to have more to do with protecting itself from litigation than seeking justice for its shareholders.
The case also shed light on the relationship between the companies and some of their professional advisers, which again included a number of the biggest stockbrokers, accountancy firms and legal partnerships in the State. The extent and methods by which they tried to influence the outcome of various inquiries on their clients behalf does them no credit. The regulators also suffered collateral damage with the Stock Exchange, in particular, seen to be uncomfortably close to some protagonists.
If the Supreme Court had struck down the Fyffes appeal, it would have sent a signal that it is appropriate for companies, individuals and institutions to conduct their business in this fashion and amount to an insider dealer's charter. Instead the court has brushed aside the legal chaff littering its path and reached a common sense conclusion that to many seemed as plain as day since 2002.
While yesterday's judgment does represent a vindication of the law as far as insider trading goes, it would be naive to expect any sea change in Irish corporate culture. DCC have already indicated that Mr Flavin will not be resigning anytime soon, with the board pledging its full support.
Equally it is thought unlikely that he will face any criminal prosecution arising out of the civil case taken by Fyffes. Indeed the issue has now being reduced to how much DCC will have to pay Fyffes in compensation.
The apparent lack of censure for Mr Flavin both by his employer and, one presumes, his colleagues and the business community at large is one of the most telling revelations of the whole sorry episode.