A german woman living in Zurich filed a suit with the german Supreme Court in Karlsruhe against the end of the world. The court denied hearing the case..
The lady in question wanted to commit Germany to actively do something about the CERN because the scientific experiments there threatened the destruction of the world (the Cern might create tiny black holes). Germany had the obligation to intervene at least until the warning of the impeding doom could be empirically confuted.

But the court found a legal response: It is not enough that the complainant announced potential events causing damage (the end of the world!) and tried to substantiate her claim by referring to the inherent dangers of the experiments which might occur (the end of the world) in her oppinion.
To accept such a lawsuit would set a precedence and would allow for strategies to sack any researchrequest by project specific warnings.

The court also missed a conclusive presentation of the complainant that the end of the world, which she feared, would surely come to pass (which is admittedly not an easy thing to do lol). The court concluded that it is not enough to base the warnings on a general suspicion of the laws of physics.
Even those who theorized that the end of the world might be possible only argued that their thought construct, which depended on many imponderable assumptions, had not yet been scientifically refuted.

Crazy.. that the courts had seriously been busy with that.