Reale v Duncan Reale; Duncan Reale v Cameda Investments

The case involved two applications for indemnity orders in relation to proceedings that were brought as derivative proceedings. The husband and wife were the real protagonists. The husband, Reale, sought leave to bring derivative proceedings against the wife’s corporation, Cameda Investments. The wife sought an indemnity order from Reale’s corporation in relation to the costs of the application and the proceedings. The wife also sought an indemnity order from Reale’s corporation for costs incurred in the proceedings. The parties were equally represented by their respective corporations. The court had to decide whether to make an indemnity order for costs under section 118A of the Corporations Act, and, if so, to what extent.

The court had to determine whether, and to what extent, an indemnity order should be made. The court had to decide on the proper approach to indemnity orders when the corporate parties are owned equally by the husband and wife. The court considered the discretionary considerations relevant to costs and whether the equal ownership of the corporations affected the outcome. The court noted that the discretionary considerations were evenly balanced between the parties.

The court held that neither party should be favoured with respect to costs. To achieve that objective, the court held that the costs should be attributed to the non-corporate parties. The court held that indemnity orders should be made so as to attribute any corporate costs to the non-corporate parties. The court held that, to achieve that objective, the orders should be made against the husband and wife, and not against their corporations. The court held that the wife was entitled to an indemnity order for the costs of the application, and that the husband was entitled to an indemnity order for the costs of the proceedings.

The court ordered that the wife was entitled to an indemnity order for the costs of the application, and that the husband was entitled to an indemnity order for the costs of the proceedings. The court ordered that the wife was entitled to an indemnity order for the costs of the application, and that the husband was entitled to an indemnity order for the costs of the proceedings. The court ordered that the wife was to pay the husband’s costs of the application, and that the husband was to pay the wife’s costs of the proceedings.