Only because Denmark officials want to avoid mass panic in the confidence of their banking system. So they allow Saxo to escape their responsibility to their clients to safeguard their funds. Disgusting bucket shop practice, considering they are an investment bank.
Indeed one is forced to think into that direction. The rulings against Saxo in countries outside Denmark are well-reasoned. And I do not think that the law in Denmark is sufficiently different or that Saxo acted substantially better there to independently reach a different conclusion. So what remains is the foul taste in your mouth of Danish officials letting a bad actor off the hook just because it is a local, and likely influencial, bank. The bottom line is that the Danish disappointingly are not living up to their own high standards in this case. Scandinavians like to stand for universal human rights, anti-corruption, transparency, openness, strong governance, etc. but when something bad happens in their own backyard, they sheepishly try to cover it up, sweep it under the carpet like everyone else.
So not trust to regulators at all? That's why I prefer to trade with FCA regulated brokers because this watchdog is much more trustworthy, imo