Facts
The present case concerns a request for explanation or correction of a decision of the FJA. The Compensation Fund for Physicians, Dentists and Veterinarians had filed such an application, as the legal ruling of the FJA judgment appeared unclear, incomplete or ambiguous, or there were contradictions between the reasons for the decision and the operative part.
The FJA explains in its judgment the requirements under which an explanation or correction of a decision is permissible. Accordingly, the explanation serves to provide a remedy if the operative part of the decision (dispositif) is unclear, incomplete, ambiguous or contradictory in itself. It can also refer to contradictions between the reasons for the decision and the operative part, but not to the reasons for the decision as such.
On the other hand, requests for explanation that aim at a substantive amendment of the decision or initiate a general discussion about the legally binding decision are inadmissible. Only what has the character of an order is accessible to the explanation from the…