1. The Family Court declared that Kevin and Jennifer’s marriage was valid after concluding that Kevin was a man.
2. The Attorney-General questioned whether Kevin was a man at the time of the wedding and was not satisfied with the Family Court’s decision. The court was called upon to interpret the meaning of the word ‘man’ for the purpose of the law of marriage as well as the meaning of the word ‘marriage’.
3. The Full Court of the Family Court interpreted the word ‘man’ to be a person who was a man at the time of marriage. The court also stated that the words ‘marriage’ and ‘man’ should be interpreted according to contemporary attitudes.
4. The Full Court of the Family Court’s interpretation of the meaning of words in the Marriage Act and the Family Law Act broadens the meaning of the words ‘man’ and ‘marriage’. This means that the range of people whom the Marriage Act and the Family Law Act apply to has also broadened.