Editing Re Kevin (section)

== Background ==
At the time of ''Re Kevin'', same-sex marriage was illegal in Australia. This case regards a transsexual man, using the alias of Kevin for this trial, who had married his wife under the assumption that the definition of man included transsexual men. The Attorney General affirmed that Kevin and his wife (alias Jennifer) were not legally able to get married as they had both been assigned the sex female at birth. The case went to court in Australian Family Court in 2001,<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.icj.org/sogicasebook/in-re-kevin-validity-of-marriage-of-transsexual-family-court-of-australia-12-october-2001/|title=In Re Kevin (Validity of marriage of transsexual), Family Court of Australia (12 October 2001) {{!}} International Commission of Jurists|last=Advocates for Justice and Human Rights (ICJ)|language=en-US|access-date=2019-06-04}}</ref> with the parties being the Attorney General, Kevin, and the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. The Attorney General rested his case on the earlier ruling of ''[[Corbett v Corbett]] (Otherwise Ashley) (1971)'', which stated that sex was decided by biology at birth. The judge in this trial (Chisholm J)  determined that measure to be insufficient, as it ignored the role of social and psychological aspects of gender. Ultimately, Chisholm J ruled that Kevin was, in the modern definition of the word, a man. This ruling was later used to affirm in other cases worldwide the marriage of transsexual people as the sex they identify with.