The short answer is yes.  As far as I know, the typical questions that a reviewer asks are (in this order):

 1. **Is it correct?**  - Your example passes this check because it all seems to be correct and there are no obvious flaws in the proofs.
 2. **Is it new?** - Strictly speaking, yes, as no-one has formally written it all down before, so your example passes.
 3. **Is it interesting?** - Now crucially, your example fails.  Yes, it is new in a sense and it looks to be correct, but it is not saying anything which is really interesting.  It could have been done pretty easily before with existing techniques, but just no-one had the time to do it or they couldn't be bothered etc.  

Criterion 3.) is admittedly quite subjective, but it is nevertheless considered to be a crucial criterion when deciding if something merits publication in a certain journal.

One could also add a lesser but still important criterion:

4. **Is it a good fit for that journal?**