"Several important precedent issues, such as the fact that the...

"Several important precedent issues, such as the fact that the court has not taken into account that the applicant wants to start not just one but four mines in the same area, that MMD has decided on a trial period with regard to essential water issues despite the fact that surface watercourses covered by environmental quality standards are at risk, that MMD has given permission despite large impact on a Natura 2000 area without taking into account the impact from other activities and that a species protection dispensation for the impact on several bird species has not been considered necessary."

So there it is.

4 so called precedent issues.

The review needs to cover off on all four. However, if all of these issues have been raised and considered before, by the lower courts, and there is nothing new here in the way of evidence ...... well......