The legal precedents, both statutory and court-made, precede this case. This case stands for a different proposition - the difficulty of reversing lower court fact finding error. This case threw light on a deficiency in the civil law process. The deficiency is tolerable when the stakes are only money.
You didn't specify, but I assume when you said "fact finding error" you are referring to the court's take on the "PVS" diagnosis.
What you said is very interesting from a legal standpoint and I'd like to discuss some of the details if you'd care to elaborate on how this case throws light on deficiencies in the civil law process.