Federal Administrative Court rejects Asfinag application: ECJ proceedings on Lobau Tunnel remain open

Background: From the abandonment of the environmental assessment to the screening

In substance, the question is whether the federal government and Asfinag should have carried out a full Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) for the Lobau Tunnel instead of limiting themselves to the faster screening procedure. The EU SEA Directive requires a comprehensive assessment for projects with potentially significant environmental impacts. Asfinag takes the view that the screening is legally sufficient; critics and the BVwG evidently see it differently.

For the environmental NGO Virus, which helped initiate the proceedings, the decision is a success. Spokesperson Wolfgang Rehm said: "Mit Genugtuung nehmen wir zur Kenntnis, dass der schon nahezu dummdreiste Versuch, das wichtige Vorabentscheidungsverfahren beim Europäischen Gerichtshof abzudrehen, nicht erfolgreich war, nun wird der EuGH Rechtssicherheit herstellen." In a further statement he added: "Die Chancen von Minister Hanke, sein superteures Wunschprojekt, das die behauptete Verkehrsentlastung nicht bringt, durchzuboxen, sind durch die aktuelle Entwicklung geschwunden."

Reactions: Praise from Virus and the Vienna Greens

The Vienna Greens also welcomed the ruling. Mobility spokespersons Kilian Stark and Heidi Sequenz said jointly: "Das Bundesverwaltungsgericht hat nun klargestellt, dass auch ein staatlicher Autobahnbetreiber an europäisches Recht gebunden ist." For Stark, a Strategic Environmental Assessment is "das einzig angemessene Instrument" for a project of this scale. Sequenz sees an "offensichtlicher Grund" behind the approach: "Der bereits laufende oberirdische Bau könnte sich als rechtlich nicht haltbar erweisen." She went on to say: "Dieses Vorgehen zeigt deutlich, dass der Minister offenbar ein negatives Ergebnis einer ordnungsgemäßen Umweltprüfung vermeiden wollte."

The Greens accuse Hanke and Asfinag of deliberately trying to circumvent a negative decision by abandoning the environmental procedure. They argue: "Hanke und die Asfinag versuchen mit allen Mitteln, die Lobauautobahn doch noch durchzusetzen – obwohl Verkehrs- und Umweltexpert:innen seit Jahren aufzeigen, dass dieses Projekt die schlechteste Lösung ist." The Vienna Greens also consider a Strategic Environmental Assessment unavoidable for a project of this scale.

The fact that above-ground construction work is already underway on parts of the project heightens the political dimension. According to Sequenz, the approach suggests that Asfinag and the ministry see risks: should the ECJ later classify the screening as insufficient, structures already built could become legally challengeable. The Vienna Greens emphasize that "für den Tunnel und die Lobau-Spange außerdem wesentliche Genehmigungen" are also lacking.

Open questions and outlook on the ECJ ruling

From Asfinag's perspective, the situation is more nuanced. The company points out that it has complied with the existing legal framework and that the screening was carried out in accordance with national regulations. The outcome of the ECJ proceedings remains to be seen, according to informal statements. Until then, ongoing construction work will continue insofar as this is legally permissible.

The Federal Administrative Court had approached the ECJ in March 2025 to seek clarification on whether the approach of Asfinag and the Transport Ministry violates European environmental law. At that time, the environmental assessment for the Lobau Tunnel, launched in 2022, had been abandoned by the Transport Ministry and replaced by a case-by-case screening, which concluded that a comprehensive assessment was not required. Environmental organizations and the Vienna Greens appealed against this to the BVwG.

What happens next is open. The BVwG stated that it would decide "im Anschluss" itself "wie das Verfahren in Österreich weiterzuführen ist". The Transport Ministry merely said: "Aus unserer Sicht bleibt daher weiterhin die Entscheidung des EuGH abzuwarten." A ruling from Luxembourg is expected in autumn. Only then will it become clear whether the screening meets the requirements of the EU directive or whether a full Strategic Environmental Assessment must be carried out retroactively.

Politically, the project thus remains on the brink. While some see the BVwG's decision as confirmation of their longstanding criticism, supporters insist on the transport policy necessity of the Lobau Tunnel. Asfinag also pointed out that a "zeitliche oder inhaltliche Prognose" is currently not possible. The coming months until the ECJ ruling are therefore regarded as a decisive phase for the billion-euro project.

In view of the ongoing construction work and the pending permits, the legal situation remains complex. Should the ECJ rule in favor of the critics, parts of the proceedings would have to be revisited – with possible consequences for sections already approved or under construction. Observers expect that the final political and legal assessment of the project will only be made after the ECJ decision in autumn.