[2003] UKHL 47, 31 July 2003. Appeal by defendants C against CA decision ([2003] 12 EG 136(CS)) whch overturned the HC decision in favour of the plaintiff T. T had claimed damages against C claiming that his accident had been caused by their breach of duty which they owned to him as a trespasser under the Occupiers' Liability Act 1984 s1. His claim was allowed on appeal to CA. C appealed to HL. HL held that C did not owe a duty of care to T after he ignored signs of 'no swimming' to dive into a shallow lake and broke his neck, leaving him paralysed. There was no liability under Occupiers' Liability Act 1984 s1(3) for the claimant's injuries from diving into a shallow lake as the risk was obvious. It did not arise from the state of the premises or anything done or not done on them and accordingly, no duty of care was owed. Appeal dismissed. Illustrates a legal issue that could face landowners as the public exercise their right to roam under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000. View judgment at www.publications.parliament.uk.