The main grounds of review were that the Minister had acted irrationally as despite having identified the main cause of the decline in abalone stocks as poaching, he suspended lawful commercial in the fishing sector. The applicants also challenged the Minister’s interpretation of studies on which he relied in support of his decision. The recommendation and decision-making process was thorough, sequential and regular and there was no evidence of the decision reached being justified by reports or recommendations produced ex post facto as alleged by the applicants. The ultimate test on review was whether the decision taken by the Minister was one which a reasonable decision-maker could take. The court found that it was, and dismissed the application.