Being a bulldog criminal defence firm doesn't mean you also try and encourage clients into pursuing potentially damaging defamation cases. After all, generally speaking people who need a criminal lawyer are being forced into court proceedings, not choosing them!
If the firm did suggest this course of action and the idea came from them, they'd want to make sure they were very, very careful about documenting the risks inherent in potentially getting the case heard again on the balance of probabilities.
As a solicitor you have to record a note of your attendance and also send a letter confirming your advice to your client, and you're supposed to give an idea of the chances of success. If that were me, both of mine would be very carefully written indeed! If they don't and haven't, they're potentially opening themselves up to action from Jackson down the line. Which is fair enough: he may be a piece of shit but his solicitors should still be fulfilling their professional duties to their clients.
It is interesting how stupid some of these stand by your man types are too. At a minimum, the best spin you can put on this, is that the men are endangering the health of their partners by having unprotected multi-partner sessions which include people they've only just met and know nothing about. Evans and Jackson could easily have acquired STIs during their totes consensual condomless encounters. If they don't use condoms with strangers, odds are they're not doing so with their long term partners, so they could easily have passed anything on. The Ched Evans case was even weirder because his partner Natasha didn't even need him for the money! Her dad was richer than him!