I think the Fisheries Act could use significant revision with respect to how evidence and the powers of the minister are exercised.
I don't think that there's a problem with judges making decisions. In the significant fisheries decisions that I'm aware of, all on judicial review with respect to PRV and the Discovery Island decision, the judge does not make the decision or substitute his or her preferred outcome for the minister's.
In fact, in all of those instances, the court simply turned the decision back to the minister to reconsider.