A vote will take place in the Commons at 7pm after the Supreme Court agreed with campaigner Gina Miller that MPs should have a say on Article 50 - the starting gun for exit negotiations.
MPs are expected to approve the bill but that won't be the end of the matter, with three more court cases seeking to disrupt our divorce from the bloc.
:: The EEA case
A group is asking the High Court to decide if Parliament should be given a vote on the UK's membership of the EEA - which allows EU members to trade freely with Iceland, Lichtenstein and Norway in a single market.
Peter Wilding, chairman of think tank British Influence and the man who is said to have coined the word Brexit, told Sky News: "The public voted to give sovereignty back to the Westminster Parliament, and what could be more important after the Gina Miller case than giving Parliament the say on whether it leaves ... the single market?
"This may be upsetting to various people who aren't thinking it through. But, really, this is about giving Westminster the perfect right to decide the future of our country.
"This is the most important decision this country is making since the Second World War, and if Parliament is not involved in it, then that's overturning the will of the people of the referendum."
An application to seek judicial review was due to be heard on 16 January but this has now been postponed until early February, it has been reported.
:: The Dublin case
A separate case is being heard in Dublin aiming to clarify the law on whether Article 50 can be reversed and exactly when that happens.
The case is being launched in Ireland in a bid to force the judgment to be, ultimately, made by European courts.
Prominent London QC Jolyon Maugham, who has raised money through crowd funding, says the law needs to be clear about what happens if the UK decides later that it wants to remain.
He told Sky News: "It's a question of European Union law, whether, if you trigger Article 50 and later change your mind, you can.
"And it's pretty clear that if we went on bended knee to the other 27 and we said, 'Look we've had second thoughts about this, can we back out?' and they all agreed, that we'd be able to do that.
"This case seeks to restore agency to our Parliament. If Parliament did change its mind, and if we won the Dublin case, we would not need to go on bended knee to seek the support of the 27.
"We'd be able to do it as right."
Mr Maugham hopes the case will be referred to the EU's Court of Justice by March.
:: The expats' Case
Another crowdfunded case has been launched by a group of British expats at the European Court of Justice.
The group is suing the European Commission President over his order to keep Britain out of EU meetings while banning informal discussions on Brexit.
Jean-Claude Juncker said there should be no negotiations until the UK triggers Article 50.
The expats say this is illegal and has a huge, unjust impact on their lives.
Wynne Edwards, of the Fair Deal for Expats group, said: "It doesn't have to do with trade deals and the common market and all that.
"These are personal matters, involving real people, such as health issues, the right to remain - and it's on both sides, it's reciprocal."
The expats' case has yet to be given a date.
(c) Sky News 2017: Three more court cases seeking to disrupt Brexit
Please click on our advert above - This funds our Brexit campaign