BAYLE & BAYLE

In *Bayle & Bayle*, Kent J of the Family Court of Australia considered an application by the Applicant to remove an affidavit, which was a report from a treating clinical psychologist, Dr B, from the Court file. The Respondent sought costs of and incidental to this application.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the affidavit of Dr B could be removed from the Court file. A secondary issue concerned the costs of the application, including whether it was reasonable for the Respondent to engage Counsel.

Kent J dismissed the Applicant's application to remove the affidavit. The Court reasoned that the affidavit was properly filed and admissible as evidence. The Court further ordered that the Applicant pay the Respondent's costs of and incidental to the application. Pursuant to Rule 19.50 of the *Family Law Rules 2004* (Cth), the Court certified that it was reasonable for the Applicant to engage Counsel to attend the hearing of the application.