The British Chiropractic Association has discontinued its case.
(However, it is the substantive case which is discontinued: there may still be further court hearings if costs are not agreed.)
One major effect of the discontinuance is that the Court of Appeal decision in Singh v BCA will not face being overturned by the Supreme Court (the former House of Lords).
The appeal case is, in my view, now binding authority on the High Court that adverse but good faith statements regarding evidence must be treated as having the defence of honest opinion.
This is an real advance, for science writing and beyond.
Another effect is that City libel lawyers touting for "reputation management" work will need to fundamentally re-think their litigation models - both in terms of tactics and strategy - when there is the possibility of internet coverage of their client's case.
BCA v Singh has shown that if a client's reputation is being taken seriously (rather than being used as a pretext for closing down criticism) then the old-style and clumsy approach to libel litigation can instead undermine a client's reputation.
So Simon's victory makes a welcome dent both to the substantive law of libel and day-to-day practice of libel litigation.
But it is only a dent.
Simon's wonderful victory should not obscure how incredibly difficult it was for him to get this far: only since 1 April has he had any advantage in this case. And at times - for example, after the preliminary ruling and at the two refusals of permission to appeal - he has been very much at a very depressing disadvantage.
And the wider problems of libel remain: there is no effective public interest defence; the menace of libel tourism continues; the costs regime is nothing less than obscene; and corporations are allowed to threaten libel suits too easily.
Anyone who had an interest in Simon's case should now follow - just as avidly- the campaign for libel reform, to which Simon is passionately committed.
Visit the Libel Reform website and if you have not signed the petition, please do so - wherever you are in the world.
We are slowly making it safer for writers and publishers in England and elsewhere to make vital contributions to a range of public debates without fear of a libel threat from English lawyers.
Our next moves involve engagement with vested interests far more powerful than the hapless and discredited BCA.
There is some way to go; but, at least, we are now at the end of the beginning.
No purely anonymous comments will be published; always use a name for ease of reference by other commenters.