In this case the motions judge (Pelletier J.), reviewed a recommendation regarding a quota allocation adjustment for an individual fisherman made by the Pacific Region Licence Appeal Board to the Minister of Fisheries. Using the Pushpanathan pragmatic and functional analysis as applied to an “expert tribunal,” the motions judge applied a standard of review of reasonableness. Upon appeal, the Federal Court of Appeal held that the recommendations of the Appeal Board itself were not reviewable, but proceeded to review the decision of the Minister based in part upon the Appeal Board’s recommendations. In doing so, the court applied the reasonableness standard of review. Since the decision of the Minister was upheld on the reasonableness standard, the court did not feel it necessary to consider whether or the patent unreasonableness test should be applied on the basis of Suresh v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) 2002 SCC 1. In addition, the court pointed out that the remedy requested by the applicant (an increased quota) could not be granted in any event because it would “merely amount to a substitution of the Court’s recommendation for that of the Panel . . .”.