That's an interesting concept.
To answer the first part of your question, no, I can't give you an example of a court case that has occurred under that circumstance.
To answer the second part of your question, I do believe that in large part it is probably because it is costly. It is burdensome for an individual to get these issues before the courts. Again, I stress the fact that in going to court on an issue like this, you're going to court on something that has already occurred as opposed to trying to have something that might occur be stopped or reviewed or looked at again. The issue has already happened, so you're going to court to try to get something reversed, which may be much more difficult than having an opportunity, through the government or through review, to have it stopped before it happens or at least to have a consultation process or some mechanism triggered that stops it before it happens, so that people don't have to resort to that as their final resort and their final way to deal with it.