Kernrechtsfrage
Whether revision should be allowed because the case raises a question of fundamental importance about the adequacy of consideration in a development agreement.
Extrahierter Entscheid
Revision is to be allowed because the case raises a question of fundamental importance, namely whether a contractual clause requiring the development contractor to bear costs that could otherwise only be imposed on third-party adjacent owners always makes the contractual arrangement inadequate under the relevant public-law contract rules.
Extrahierte Begründung
The court found that the complained-of clause could require clarification by the Federal Administrative Court and therefore satisfied the statutory ground of fundamental importance for allowing revision.