Going by the precedents set by the other cases, I'd just have to assume McCormack is in the clear at this point, after several other courts have roundly decided that Wright enjoys no notable reputation that could be tarnished.
Don't be so sure here, given how extremely awful UK libel law is, it is completely plausible that wright could win. His lawsuits against other people were either tossed for jurisdiction issues or dropped because he was going to focus on McCormack. ... I'm guessing he chose to focus on McCormack because he gauged him to be the most financially vulnerable target. My understanding is that UK will put the burden of the case substantially on McCormack, then wright will probably saturate him with endless thickets of forgeries, making the defence extremely expensive.
I'm not familiar with the finer nuances of the McCormack case but I do wonder what the main difference is between his and Adam Back's case is. They both reside in the same jurisdiction and they both referred to Wright as a fraud. Do you have any insider information you can share about how Back got his suit dismissed so quickly?
I've listened to a few of Peter's podcasts and it sounds like the lawsuit is a royal pain in the ass, but he's not giving up or giving in any time soon and vows to fight it until the bitter end, which could be years or even a decade. He's undertaking what is one of the most honorable struggles happening in the bitcoin media sphere. Let's hope his lawyers are better than Craig's.