Overview
- The Federal Administrative Court declared the first A26‑Ost section’s plan unlawful and non-executable for failing to meet §13 of the Federal Climate Protection Act.
- The court criticized the choice of Variant Süd 1 for skipping a robust alternatives analysis tied to national climate targets.
- Judges noted the selected route would consume about 18.5 hectares of high-quality peat soils with separate climate relevance.
- An alternative Variant Süd 2 could be shorter, cheaper, and avoid peatland impacts, so authorities must at least conduct a coarse comparison of routes.
- The defects can be remedied in a supplementary procedure, leaving the 9.7‑kilometre harbor link’s timing and political support uncertain, while a refinery operator’s separate suit was dismissed.