Ngaronga v Lowe

[2025] NZHC 3031

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND HAMILTON REGISTRY

I TE KŌTI MATUA O AOTEAROA KIRIKIRIROA ROHE

CIV-2025-419-000064

[2025] NZHC 3031

UNDER

Section 339 of the Property Law Act 2007 and Part 19 of the High Court Rules 2016

BETWEEN

PAULA JILL NGARONGA

Applicant

AND

GEOFFREY MORRIS LOWE

Respondent

Hearing:	On the papers
Counsel:	W E Andrews for Applicant J A L Guy for Respondent
Judgment:	14 October 2025

JUDGMENT OF ANDERSON J

[Costs]

This judgment was delivered by me on 14 October 2025 at 3.00 pm pursuant to r 11.5 of the High Court Rules 2016.

………………………………

Registrar/Deputy Registrar

Solicitors:

Davenports West Lawyers, Auckland Vodanovich Law, Auckland

Gold Legal Limited, Pukekohe

NGARONGA v LOWE [2025] NZHC 3031 [14 October 2025]

[1]                 The parties were in a de facto relationship which ended in April 2024. By my judgment dated 4 September 2025, I made an order for the sale of the property under s 339 of the Property Law Act 2007 and for ancillary orders to give effect to it.1 This judgment addresses costs.

[2]                 Ms Ngaronga, as the successful party, is entitled to costs on a 2B basis. However, she submits that increased costs should be awarded on the basis that      Mr Lowe has failed to act reasonably.2

[3]                 Specifically, she seeks an uplift to scale costs of between 75 per cent and     90 per cent3 for the following reasons:

(a)Mr Lowe never accepted the reality that the property needed to be sold for its market price, even by the time of the hearing.

(b)Mr Lowe failed to accept an offer “without prejudice save as to costs” by which the applicant proposed proceeding to auction with a reserve price recommended by the agent. If, during the auction, bidding paused at a price below the reserve, the reserve was to be reduced to the highest bid and the auction was to continue “on market”.

(c)Mr Lowe unilaterally terminated the agency agreement to sell the property and took no steps to rent it or put the property on the market, while denying payment for occupational rent on unmeritorious grounds.

(d)Mr Lowe continually alleged that Ms Ngaronga’s solicitors were conflicted and that he had been deprived of independent legal counsel.

1      Ngaronga v Lowe [2025] NZHC 2558.

2      High Court Rules 2016, r 14.6(3)(d).

3      This is less than the applicant’s actual legal costs, for which she has provided invoices.

[4]                 I do not make any uplift on the basis of the “without prejudice save as to costs” letter. The orders I made as to sale differed appreciably from requiring the property to be sold on the day of auction.4

[5]                 However, I accept an uplift is otherwise appropriate. Mr Lowe’s intransigence was a major reason why the order for sale was necessary and his conduct including in respect to the conflict issue justifies an increase in costs. In the circumstances, I consider that a 50 per cent increase in scale costs is appropriate.

[6]                 I note that the applicant has claimed for costs on its costs memorandum. I decline to award costs on costs, given that I declined to award an uplift for her offer to settle and she has not received the 75 to 90 per cent uplift she claimed for.5

[7]                 Scale costs on a 2B basis are $15,774. I therefore award costs of $23,661 (representing a 50 per cent uplift)6 plus disbursements of $1,579.7

Anderson J

4      I provided for the property to be listed following auction at a stated price.

5      Paper Reclaim Ltd v Aotearoa International Ltd [2007] NZCA 544, (2007) 18 PRNZ 743 at [62]; and Helilogging Ltd (in rec and liq) v Civil Aviation Authority of New Zealand [2021] NZHC 1676 at [34].

6      As set out at sch A annexed to this judgment.

7      As set out at sch B annexed to this judgment.

SCHEDULE A

Step claimed	Daily recovery rate	Time allocation (band B unless noted otherwise)	Scale costs
Step 37 Filing originating application	$2,390	2	$4,780.00
Filing three additional affidavits	$2,390	1 (collective)	$2,390.00
Step 11 Filing case management memorandum	$2,390	0.4	$956.00
Step 12 Appearance at callover	$2,390	0.2	$478.00
Step 40 Preparation of written submissions	$2,390	1.5	$3,585.00
Step 41 Preparation by applicant of bundle for hearing	$2,390	0.6	$1,434.00
Step 42 Appearance at hearing by sole or principal counsel	$2,390	0.5	$1,195.00
Post-judgment memoranda	$2,390	0.4 (collective)	$956.00
Total			$15,774.00
Uplifted by 50 per cent			$23,661.00

SCHEDULE B

Disbursements claimed	Amount claimed
Photocopying and preparation of bundle	$45.00
Filing fee	$702.00
Scheduling fee	$832.00
Total disbursements	$1,579.00