Hundreds of ex-servicemen who say they were made ill as a result of being exposed to radiation during British nuclear weapons tests in the 1950s have lost their Supreme Court bid to be able to launch damages claims against the Ministry of Defence.
More than 1,000 veterans want compensation and have been battling for permission to launch damages claims for some two years.
Wendy Brothers speaks to the media outside the Supreme Court, London, watched by Stacy Clark and Rose Clark, who are representing their ex-service family members
Although today's judgment blocks most claims, a certain number can still proceed because of an earlier legal ruling.
The veterans took their fight to the Supreme Court - the highest court in the UK - in November after battles in the High Court and the Court of Appeal.
In 2009, 10 "lead" claimants won the first round of the veterans' battle when a High Court judge said claims could go ahead.
But the MoD appealed and, in 2010, a Court of Appeal ruling blocked nine of the 10 lead claims when judges said they were "statute-barred" because they had been made too late.
A challenge by the veterans against that Court of Appeal decision was rejected today by Supreme Court justices by a four-to-three majority.
Veterans blame ill-health - including cancer, skin defects and fertility problems - on their involvement in British nuclear tests in Australia, on Christmas Island and in the Pacific Ocean between 1952 and 1958.
The MoD acknowledges a "debt of gratitude" but denies negligence.
Lord Wilson, one of the judges who rejected the appeal, ruled that the actions had "no real prospect of success".
Lord Wilson said, after reading out a summary of the court's decision: "Putting aside the law for one moment, all seven members of the court would wish to record their personal sympathy for the veterans."
He said: "It must be bad enough for the nine veterans, and the other claimants, to learn that they have lost this final round, but to learn that they have lost by the narrowest possible margin must make it even worse."
The panel was made up of Supreme Court president Lord Phillips, Lord Walker, Lady Hale, Lord Brown, Lord Mance, Lord Kerr and Lord Wilson.
Lawyers said they were calculating how many veterans, or their families, would still be able to launch damages claims in the High Court and estimated that the number could still be in the hundreds.
They said the fight for "justice" would go on and urged the government to set up a compensation scheme.
Veterans' families said they were disappointed with the ruling and called on ministers to acknowledge that servicemen had been "put at risk" and should be compensated.
The veterans allege that they were exposed to fallout radiation from the nuclear tests and that this exposure has caused illness, disability or death. Both exposure and causation are denied by the MoD.
When the nine cases were blocked by the Court of Appeal, the deciding judges also declined to exercise their powers of discretion, saying veterans lacked evidence about the causes of illnesses.
Lawyers representing veterans then tried to persuade the seven Supreme Court justices to overrule the Court of Appeal - and allow all 10 "lead" claims to go ahead.
At the heart of the appeal was whether many of the claims were "time-barred" under the provisions of the Limitation Act 1980.
It provides that an action shall not be brought after the expiration of three years from the date on which the cause of action accrued or the date of knowledge of the person injured.
Lord Wilson, dismissing the nine appeals, said: "In my view, the Court of Appeal was correct to conclude that all nine of the appellants had the requisite knowledge prior to the period of three years relevant to them.
"For the facts of each case ... drive a conclusion that, prior to the relevant period, each reasonably believed that the injury was able to be attributed to the nuclear tests conducted by the respondent (MoD) between 1956 and 1958."
Lord Wilson said the veterans' QC, in asking the court to allow them further time, "concedes that even today the appellants lack evidence with which to establish a credible case that the injuries were caused by the tests".
The Court of Appeal, which described the veterans as being confronted with "very great difficulties" in establishing causation, was correct not to exercise its discretion to allow the claims to proceed.
Lord Brown, who also dismissed the appeals along with Lord Wilson, Lord Walker and Lord Mance, said: "The plain fact is that, despite decades spent urgently trying to assemble a viable case, on the evidence as it presently stands these claims - in which huge costs have already been expended - are doomed to fail."
He added that even if he had been "persuaded that time had not run out in any of these cases" he would have been "disposed to dismiss them".
Lord Brown concluded: "In short, although the veterans can hardly be expected to recognise this, these appeals now provide the court with the opportunity, rather than yet again to extend, instead once and for all to end, the false hopes on which these claims have for so long rested."
Lord Phillips, Lady Hale and Lord Kerr allowed the appeal.
A spokesman for the MoD said after the ruling: "The Ministry of Defence recognises the debt of gratitude we have to the servicemen who took part in the nuclear tests.
"They were important tests that helped to keep this nation secure at a difficult time in terms of nuclear technology.
"The Supreme Court ruled today in favour of the MoD that the claims brought by nuclear test veterans were time-barred and declined to allow the claims to proceed under the statutory discretion.
"Perhaps of greater significance is that all the justices recognised that the veterans would face great difficulty proving a causal link between illnesses suffered and attendance at the tests.
"The Supreme Court described the claims as having no reasonable prospect of success and that they were doomed to fail."
The spokesman added: "Where individual veterans are able to produce reliable evidence to raise a reasonable doubt that their illness is related to their service, they may be entitled to a War Pension."