At least this time the convoluted, abstract "judgment" was issued in English. I remain uncertain of the actual reasons that the ECJ and its auxiliaries continue to neglect issuing opinions in English so frequently, given that the EU is coming closer and closer to a guerrilla trade war with the US that, I'm afraid to say, it can't win. It only undermines the ability of its own citizens to understand, protect, and assert their rights against the notoriously monolingual US business communityand this kind of arrogant disregard for clear communication occurs far too often in matters involving European subsidiaries of US corporations. I strongly suspect that one of the rationales for objecting to the US Supreme Court's recent trend toward noticing the existence of foreign and international law in its decisions is that so few lawyers (and/or their clients) are comfortable with the foreign-language origin of that foreign and international lawbecause they themselves do not have much, if any, familiarity with foreign languages beyond (perhaps) high-school Spanish.
<SARCASM> Of course, this particular dispute is irrational to begin with. The Czech brewery should no more want its product compared to the American "beer" sold under the Budweiser name than would a car manufacturer want its product compared to the Yugo. </SARCASM>