When is a repeal not a repeal?

The local man who paraded in Bedworth on Armistice Day last year wearing a load of medals he wasn't entitled to has been prosecuted and convicted under s.197 of the Army Act 1955 which makes it a criminal offence to "...without authority, use or wear any military decoration...". Despite the outrage expressed by some ex-servicemen, given that he's clearly a Walter Mitty type figure this does seem rather like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut, but more to the point is whether the 1955 Act was still in force at the relevant time. The Armed Forces Act of 2006 repealed the 1955 Act in its entirety, and came into force on 31st October last year, whereas the Armistice parade was of course on November 11th. There doesn't appear to be any question of any offence being committed under the 2006 Act, so should the prosecution have been brought at all? The waters are considerably muddied by a provision in the 2006 Act which, notwithstanding that that Act clearly repeals the 1955 Act, appears to allow the 1955 Act - or certain aspects of it - to continue in force from year to year subject to the annual issue of a Statutory Instrument. Wonderful drafting and a lawyer's dream!