His conviction for rape has been quashed as it is now deemed unsafe.
However, the judge has ruled that there should be a re-trial. So this saga is not over yet.
My initial thought is that if the judge feels that a re-trial is necessary then there is still a case against him, albeit less some of the original evidence that his lawyers have been able to rule out as unsafe.
If there wasn't still a chance that there's a case against him, then I don't think they would push for a re-trial - or maybe that's just standard in these sort of cases?