The case of a severely brain-damaged Muslim man at the centre of a High Court battle over his treatment has been adjourned for his doctors to consider fresh evidence about his condition.
A judge at the Court of Protection in London heard that new video footage led an expert in neurology to conclude that he is "no longer in a persistent vegetative state".
The expert said "Mr L", from Greater Manchester, was now "most likely in a minimally conscious state."
He declared that Mr L should be resuscitated if he suffers a fresh cardiac arrest or other life-threatening condition pending the resumed hearing, unless doctors judge such action would not restart his heart and maintain breathing.
The judge adjourned the case until October 1.
However the judge, Mr Justice Moylan, also stressed that "no medical practitioner or nurse is required to act contrary to their professional judgment and duties as assessed at the relevant time".
The case was triggered by the Pennine Acute Hospitals NHS Trust, which is responsible for the care of the 55-year-old man, currently being treated in a hospital high dependency unit (HDU).
The Trust is asking the court to declare that it would not be in Mr L's best interests to offer him ventilation or resuscitation if there is "a life-threatening event" because he has no "meaningful quality of life".
Mr L suffered a cardiac arrest in mid-July which resulted in severe brain damage.
It led to a "do not resuscitate" (DNR) notice being placed in his notes without his family being properly consulted, breaching the Trust's own policy.
A Trust doctor apologised to the court for the notice, which was removed following complaints from Mr L's family.
The family is now fighting the Trust's application to withhold life-prolonging treatment after Mr L was diagnosed to be in a persistent vegetative state.
They say he has shown signs of responding to his family.
They also argue that, according to their Muslim faith, "life is sacred" and everything must be done to prolong life - including life-prolonging treatment, no matter the pain - "until God takes it away".
The Trust's clinicians say Mr L has "minimal prospects of improving neurological function" if life-prolonging treatment were given.
The case took a dramatic twist when the family's QC told the judge that Dr Peter Newman, an independent expert in neurology, had seen new video footage and, on the basis of what he had seen, formed the view that Mr L was no longer in a persistent vegetative state.
Speaking outside court, Helen Lewis, clinical negligence expert with Manchester-based firm Pannone, said on behalf of Mr L's family: "The family feel vindicated in contesting this action.
"But, more importantly, they are relieved that medically L is not in a vegetative state and there is hope of recovery.
"They have asked for their privacy to be respected in the weeks and months ahead as they concentrate on assisting L to make as full a recovery as possible."
Ms Lewis said: "We now await a response from the Trust as to how their clinicians reconsider their position in the light of this new and dramatic evidence.
"It is certainly a sobering thought that the Trust would have put in place a DNR order if the family had not challenged their stance through the legal system."
She said that the interim order afforded the family "some level of protection".