Just for once the timing favoured Micheál Martin's ill-starred three-legged Coalition. There was intense relief in news at breakfast time on Wednesday that the lower EU court overturned a 2016 Commission ruling that the giant tech firm Apple owed €13bn in back taxes due to favourable Irish tax treatment.
The timing meant it also filled a chunk of the news agenda dominated by the sacking of embattled Agriculture Minister Barry Cowen. By evening bad news on the "real Irish question" - just where can you get a drink? - further crowded out the Cowen story.
For Finance Minister Paschal Donohoe this was total vindication. "Much of the criticism levelled at Ireland in relation to how we have handled the taxation matter has been given a very comprehensive answer today," Mr Donohoe said that afternoon.
"This is a matter that has caused reputational difficulty during the many years in which it has played out. I think the ruling that has been made here today will lead many to reassess their view of our corporate tax regime and some of the statements that have been made about it," the Finance Minister added defiantly.
He was entitled to a rhetorical flourish. But it is important to recognise exactly what the EU's second-highest court was saying in the Apple case. This was a specific ruling on a specific point.
The court unequivocally said the EU Commission was wrong to decide in 2016 that Ireland had offered State aid to Apple via special tax arrangements not given other firms. The wider questions about the tax avoidance structures used by major multinationals, their appropriateness and how Ireland should address them are separate despite a clear link.
In essence the court said the Commission was wrong to say Apple revenues generated outside America - and routed via Ireland - should have been hit by Irish tax.
The Brussels EU executive has two months to decide on an appeal on points of law only. It will be conscious that the higher European Court of Justice has no great record of overturning lower EU court rulings.
The outcome justifies the decision of Ireland to take an expensive appeal in this case. It sets aside arguments by Sinn Féin and leftist parties that Ireland was spending millions of euro of taxpayers' money to reject a €13bn windfall in straitened times. This money was never coming to the Irish national coffers.
If the Government and Apple had lost there would have been considerable further damage to Ireland's international reputation. But the win still leaves Ireland's company tax regime in the spotlight.
Changes to Irish tax rules have been made since this case flared up. These include the overdue phasing out of the "double Irish" tax allowance. More changes, happily leading to increased revenue from multinational firms, have come via a process happening under the aegis of the OECD.
But US opposition has now raised questions about the future of the OECD initiative. Multinational tax wars could get far worse for countries like Ireland with knock-on effects on things like international trade.
Brussels has failed, thanks to the lower EU court, to beat "aggressive" tax planning under state-aid rules not just with Apple in Ireland but with Starbucks in the Netherlands and a Belgian tax scheme for 39 multinationals. Now it is trying another route.
EU officials are looking at using a little-noticed EU Treaty clause called Article 116. It may allow the Commission to act against member states whose tax policies distort competition in the single market.
It could obviate the national tax veto prized by Ireland and be done by majority vote with European Parliament backing.
The EU Commission has lost a battle - it will resume its war. Intense pressure on Ireland will continue.
Relief from this Apple tax "win" may be very short-lived indeed. Ireland may have to increase efforts to make more compromises.