Yes, of course, we can have examples of real-world cases where we have a causal relationship without a strong correlation; an obvious place to check is causal time-series models. Assume for example we have the structure:

It is easy for to say that $Y_t\perp \!\!\!\perp X_{t-1}|Y_{t-1}$ based on $d$-separation, i.e. we have conditional independence between $X_{t-1}$ and $Y_t$ given $Y_{t-1}$. Here, only the value of $X_t$ would be assistive to predict $Y_t$ and thus Granger causality (or some other "basic correlation" method) would not detect the influence of $X$ on $Y$ because the past of $X$ influences $Y_t$ only via the past of $Y$. As a result, the causal relation of $X$ on $Y$ is completely missed based on correlation measurements; I "borrowed" this example from Ch. 10 in "Elements of Causal Inference" (2017) by Peters et al., check it out for more formal treatment. Now for a published result: "A study of problems encountered in Granger causality analysis from a neuroscience perspective" (2017) by Stokes and Purdon is a quick one; they use a VAR model instead of a simple ARX as above but the logic is the same - a vector auto-regressive (VAR) model generalising a single-variable autoregressive (AR) model by allowing for multivariate time series. In general, search the terms "Granger Causality" and "Common-cause fallacy" alongside each other and a few references pop up; "A review of the Granger-causality fallacy" (2015) by Maziarz is a good place to start too.