Faulty plan or adoption agreement language where "nobody got hurt"

[Guest Enda80]

Does anyone know of any examples of plans with defective language or adoption agreements with unacceptable language where "nobody got hurt", the effect of the impact never got expressed, but the court still ruled that a sanction must get paid.

[Guest Sieve]

Is the language merely bad language? Or did it result in an operational failure? Any such cases you are seeking would clearly turn on the indentified error, and probably not apply to any error whatsoever. Describe your (or a) specific example.