The legal status is the same as it’s been because the effect of the ruling is suspended.
Section 210 to 213: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-46/
" I would dismiss the appeals and allow the cross-appeal. Section 210, as it relates to prostitution, and ss. 212(1)(j) and 213(1)© are declared to be inconsistent with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and hence are void. The word “prostitution” is struck from the definition of “common bawdy-house” in s. 197(1) of the Criminal Code as it applies to s. 210 only.
 I have concluded that each of the challenged provisions, considered independently, suffers from constitutional infirmities that violate the Charter. That does not mean that Parliament is precluded from imposing limits on where and how prostitution may be conducted. Prohibitions on keeping a bawdy-house, living on the avails of prostitution and communication related to prostitution are intertwined. They impact on each other. Greater latitude in one measure — for example, permitting prostitutes to obtain the assistance of security personnel — might impact on the constitutionality of another measure — for example, forbidding the nuisances associated with keeping a bawdy-house. The regulation of prostitution is a complex and delicate matter. It will be for Parliament, should it choose to do so, to devise a new approach, reflecting different elements of the existing regime.
 The choice between suspending the declaration of invalidity and allowing it to take immediate effect is not an easy one. Neither alternative is without difficulty. However, considering all the interests at stake, I conclude that the declaration of invalidity should be suspended for one year."
Looks like it’s heading the way of Amsterdam and Germany, yeah. Although, once criminal law is taken out of it, prostitution regulation will fall to the provinces which may differ in their approach. I’m pretty sure that the Conservatives will be really happy to let the provinces decide how prostitution should be handled. The fed might still include some anti-pimp and anti-trafficking legislation which, if properly tailored, would be constitutional.