Harrell and Hancock-Harrell (No 3)

In *Harrell and Hancock-Harrell (No 3)*, Forrest J of the Family Court of Australia considered an application by the father to discharge existing interim parenting orders. These orders stipulated that the child live with the mother and have supervised time with the father. The father sought to vary these orders, requesting that the child live with him and spend supervised time with the mother.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the existing interim parenting orders, which provided for the child to live with the mother and spend supervised time with the father, remained in the child's best interests. The court was required to assess the evidence and determine if the father's application to reverse the living arrangements and introduce supervised time for the mother was warranted.

Forrest J dismissed the father's application, finding that the current interim orders were in the child's best interests. The court's reasoning, though not detailed in the provided text, led to the conclusion that a change in the existing arrangements was not supported by the evidence. Consequently, the court also dismissed the respondent mother's oral application for costs.