I believe that an appeal will overturn the current verdict on the basis of freedom of association rights.
VANDER the case centres on hate speech. Shunning comes into play because they used examples of it to prove that watchtowers hate speech toward those of others faiths or beliefs has damaging, even violent, results, namely cruelty and shunning. It’s not not shunning they are legislating against. Not freedom of association.
To respond to your statement they may play it smart and not appeal. As others have said if it goes all the way to Strasbourg and the ECHR, the rest of the world will sit up and take notice and any ruling would be seen as persuasive or strong precedent in other States.
I would have thought you of all people would see that prejudice against a person because of their faith/beliefs/lack thereof, is wrong.