I note that in this article the comment is made - twice - that advisers 'cannot postpone complying with the Code'.
The way this works out is that although you will have longer to get authorised, if you are selling a product that requires authorisation, you remain bound by the Code. So you still need to apply the requirements of the Code at the time - not June 2010 - that means all the procedural bits about ensuring suitability, disclosing conflicts, and not offering advice in circumstances where you are insufficiently educated... which is th emurky bit. You see, your requirement for completing your education has been postponed, I think, but you are not given relief from the Code, I think (based only on a press release and a news story, of course, so I could be wrong).
Now, you are probably Okay - why? because first of all you can choose not to offer advice in areas where you are not competent (in fact, you should not be doing that today). You can probably demonstrate that your knowledge is reasonable even without the formal qualification - going through the ETITO self-assessment test might be a good contrbutor to such a defence - and you can probably point to the 'reasonable' part of the care skill and diligence test, and claim that since almost no-one else had completed their qualification, you were still reasonably well-qualified.
But it's worth thinking about.