The world in brief

LONDON — Britain’s Supreme Court ruled Monday that families of patients who are in a long-term persistent vegetative state do not need to seek a court’s permission to have life support removed, in a case seen as placing the right-to-die decision back in the hands of loved ones and doctors.

The ruling comes in a case involving a man identified as Mr. Y, a 52-year-old financial analyst who suffered severe brain damage after a heart attack. Experts agreed that even if he had regained consciousness, he’d have profound cognitive and physical disabilities.

The case landed in the courts because as a matter of practice, doctors have sought the approval of a court before removing food and water from a patient — even if the family agreed that this was in the ill person’s best interest.

In November, a High Court judge ruled that it was not mandatory to take the matter to the courts since there was no dispute between relatives and specialists. But the official solicitor, which represents those who are incapacitated, appealed.

The court rejected the appeal. The ruling means that families making decisions over the care of unresponsive loved ones can avoid lengthy court battles.

Mr. Y died before the case was heard by the Supreme Court, but it proceeded because of its importance.