Kernrechtsfrage
Whether revision should be allowed because of the fundamental importance of the legal question on an omitted or defective FFH preliminary assessment as a procedural error under § 4(1) no. 3 or § 4(1a) UmwRG.
Extrahierter Entscheid
Revision was allowed because the case is capable of clarifying whether and to what extent such an omission or defect can amount to a procedural error under the Environmental Legal Remedies Act.
Extrahierte Begründung
The court found the question to be of fundamental importance within the meaning of § 132(2) no. 1 VwGO and suitable for clarification in revision proceedings.