The Supreme Court will rule today on whether doctors should have been allowed to withhold treatment from a "gravely ill" man.
Liverpool guitarist David James, who was in his late 60s, died 10 months ago, shortly after the Court of Appeal decided that withdrawal of treatment would be in his best interests.
His widow May has asked the Supreme Court to overrule that decision.
The owners of a bed and breakfast who refused to let a gay couple share a room in their hotel said they found the whole situation "thoroughly regretful" but have vowed to continue their legal fight.
Hazelmary and Peter Bull are taking their appeal to the Supreme Court tomorrow after they were ordered to pay £3,600 to civil partners Martyn Hall and Steven Preddy in 2008, to the Supreme Court.
Mrs Bull told Daybreak they "clearly stated" they only allowed married, heterosexual couples to share beds in the 28 years they ran the Chymorvah Hotel in Cornwall.
For divorcees, who suspect their partners have been hiding their money in their businesses, there was an important legal ruling today.
Social Affairs Editor Penny Marshall reports:
A driver severely injured in a crash triggered by a suicidal man walking in front of a lorry failed in his bid to win criminal injuries at the Supreme Court today.
Gareth Jones claimed that Barry Hughes committed a "crime against the person" when he stepped in front of a lorry and was killed on the M25 in January 2005. The lorry that hit Mr Hughes then swerved and hit Mr Jones, who was severely injured and required full-time care.
His lawyers argued Mr Hughes could have foreseen his actions might cause harm to someone else and was guilty of inflicting grievous bodily harm. They argued Mr Jones was entitled to compensation from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA).
The Supreme Court disagreed.
The families of soldiers who have been killed in battle fought to take the human rights' fight to the Supreme Court.
Sue Smith, 51, of Tamworth, Staffordshire, whose son Private Phillip Hewett, 21, was killed seven years ago, wept outside the Court of Appeal in October and described the Ministry of Defence's attitude as "despicable".
It is just so dismissive. It 'doesn't matter': they are Action Men; if you break them, just bury them. But they are not just Action Men. People need to make a stand.
Thousands of relatives of industrial workers who died of asbestos-related lung cancer will get compensation, after a "landmark" ruling.Read the full story ›
Municipal Mutual Insurance is one of four insurance firms involved in the asbestos legal action. In a statement it said:
Whilst the ruling does not reflect MMI's favoured outcome, we welcome the clarity this judgment brings as it enables MMI to determine the extent of its liabilities... It should be noted that MMI has continued to compensate local authority employers for mesothelioma claims, despite not being obliged to pay out claims until the outcome of the case was known.
Maureen Edwards, whose father died of mesothelioma, said she was delighted by today's ruling after a 'horrendous' fight for justice.
Leslie Screach died in 2003 after being exposed to asbestos fibres. Today his daughter Ruth Durham said she still had mixed emotions:
I am delighted to hear of the court's decision which will now see justice done for my father and the other mesothelioma sufferers. I was determined to see this through with a positive outcome for all those who, like my dad, suffered so terribly because of someone else's negligence. I miss him every day and no sum of money will ever bring him back or make up for what he went through.
Lawyer Helen Ashton said today's ruling provided "clarity and comfort" for families of mesothelioma victims. She represented the lead claimant in the case:
As well as the people currently directly affected by asbestos related disease, this judgment means that the thousands of people who are yet to be given the devastating news that they have the deadly illness will at least know that their families can get access to justice and receive the financial security they need. But the sad fact is that many victims of mesothelioma who have been awaiting the outcome of this appeal may not have lived long enough to know if their families will now receive the compensation they deserve.