Wood v Semantic Software Asia Pacific Pty Ltd (No 2)

In the matter of *Wood v Semantic Software Asia Pacific Pty Ltd (No 2)*, the applicant, Wood, sought to recover costs from the respondent, Semantic Software Asia Pacific Pty Ltd. The respondent had filed an application seeking to amend its cross-claim and for a stay of orders requiring payment, as well as an adjournment of the hearing of that application. The decision was made by Judge Manousaridis.

The court was required to determine the merit of the respondent's applications. Specifically, it needed to assess whether there was any justification for adjourning the hearing of the application, whether the proposed amended cross-claim had any merit, and whether a stay of payment orders should be granted.

Judge Manousaridis found no merit in any of the respondent's applications. The court dismissed the application for an adjournment of the hearing of the application, and also dismissed the substantive application filed by the respondent. Consequently, the court ordered that the respondent pay the applicant's costs of the application, including the costs associated with the adjournment application, pursuant to s 570(2)(b) of the *Fair Work Act 2009* (Cth).