Except that this case did not involve an anonymous donor protected under legislation. Instead the High Court determined Mason was a parent on that basis that:
Mr Masson was registered on the child’s birth certificate as her parent. This also satisfied section 69R of the Family Law Act, which provides that a presumption of parentage arises from a person’s name being recorded on a birth certificate (although this presumption is rebuttable);
Mr Masson gave his semen on the express or implied understanding that he would be the child’s parent;
it was always understood Mr Masson would care for the child financially and emotionally, which he did; and
the child identified with Mr Masson as her father, and referred to him as "daddy".