Another consumer protection law in The Netherlands is that consumers are guaranteed a 2 year warranty under EU consumer laws. Which per default replaces Apple's standard 1 year warranty.
That's nonsense and you should know it. Apple's 1 year warranty is a manufacturer's warranty. Apple can use any terms they like. You can decide to not buy if you don't like the warranty.
Under EU consumer laws, you have statutory rights (not a warranty). The seller (not the manufacturer) has to make sure that the product they sell is of reasonable quality. In the small print it says that within the first six months the seller has to help you unless they can prove there was no defect when the product was sold (for example the screen is broken because you dropped it or your friend dropped it), after six months the seller has to help you _if you can prove_ the defect was there when the product was sold. That requirement is not present in Apple's 12 month manufacturer's warranty.
And in the 12 months where you have both a warranty and statutory rights, you are free to ask either the manufacturer or the seller for help, and neither can refuse and tell you to go to the other.
Ok let's take your analogy a little further. Let's say you bought you brand new truck and a week later it broke down. The manufacturer says your truck isn't repairable but they've got an identical spec truck that's a year old. The year old truck is used but your truck is now also used so it's a like for like swap.?
You can never work in absolutes. The one week old truck is one week old, with a one year old truck you don't get an equivalent replacement. What if they have a one week old truck that was repossessed because it turned out the buyer lied about being able to pay for it? One week old against one week old?
With a Mac, or iPad, or iPhone, as you use it, you eventually reach a point where a refurbished replacement is either exactly as good, or even better, than your device which is now used. I can't say exactly where this point is. After a week of use, no. After a week of use, the refurbished one is better. After four months, like in this case? Maybe. Remember that people have 14 days to return an iPad, and those returned iPads cannot be sold as new. If your iPad breaks after 4 months, and they give you one that was returned after 10 days of use, then surely you are better off.
But this isn't about whether Apple is doing the right thing, or whether a customer gets a replacement that is as good as their device or not, it's about what this court decided and what Apple will do. What Apple will do is give your a new device. For the future, they will try to repair your device. Since they are not required by law to give you _any_ replacement if it can be repaired, they can offer either to repair or to give you a refurbished device, if you accept it. If you insist on your right to a new one, they will repair. The alternative is that they will give everyone brand new replacements and raise prices.