I could be seen the other way around: theoretically he gould have known that the ruling would make the price drop so selling before ruling (which he did) would

I could be seen the other way around: theoretically he gould have known that the ruling would make the price drop so selling before ruling (which he did) would be better for his wealth than selling after the ruling. I have no idea if that is meaningful if done a year before actual ruling and in the amount he held.