Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• Plaintiff Martina Laudahn’s litigation strategy relied heavily on pseudo-legal doctrines including “tacit acceptance,” leading to findings of abuse of process.

• The Court struck Martina Laudahn’s pleadings and dismissed her action in Pt.H No. 495007; damages of $183,258.29 were awarded to Chedabucto on its counterclaim.

• Summary judgment and default judgment were granted against Martina and Carina Laudahn in Pt.H No. 517851, voiding the transfer of three property lots.

• Martina Laudahn failed to comply with court orders, including payment of $50,000 for security for costs, further supporting the dismissal.

• Costs were awarded on a substantial indemnity basis of $91,113.75 against Martina Laudahn in favor of Chedabucto and the Peters.

• The Court cited conduct that impaired judicial proceedings, relying on Rules 45, 77, 88, and 13 of the Nova Scotia Civil Procedure Rules.

Background and facts of the case

This litigation arose from an agreement between Martina Laudahn and Chedabucto Homes Limited, along with its principals Michael Peters and Irmgard Peters, for the construction of a custom home at 39 Pioneer Lane, Militia Point, Nova Scotia. The agreement began in 2016. Martina Laudahn claimed damages exceeding $2 million, alleging breach of trust, loss of reputation, defective workmanship, and especially heating system deficiencies, among others.

Laudahn asserted that the contract was for a fixed price, whereas Chedabucto contended the agreement was verbal, and only an estimate was provided. Chedabucto argued that additional requests from Martina led to higher costs, and by March 2019, she had exhausted her initial deposit, owed $30,118.82 in out-of-pocket costs, and refused further payments.

Martina filed her initial action on December 19, 2019 (Pt.H No. 495007), and Chedabucto later filed a second action on September 14, 2022 (Pt.H No. 517851) concerning allegedly fraudulent conveyances of property to Martina’s daughter Carina Laudahn.

Conduct and procedural history

The Court extensively addressed the procedural history from 2019 to 2024, including Martina’s repeated non-compliance with court directions, use of voluminous filings, and reliance on pseudo-legal theories, particularly “tacit procuration” (or acceptance). She also challenged the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, claiming it was subordinate to a “Court of Record” that she created.

The Court issued multiple orders, including:

• March 10, 2022: Restricting Martina from filing documents without leave and prohibiting OPCA-style arguments.

• June 29, 2022: Ordered her to pay $5,000 in costs for abuse of process.

• January 12, 2023: Ordered her to deposit $50,000 as security for costs and pay $1,750 in additional costs.

Martina failed to comply with all cost orders.

Judicial outcome of Pt.H No. 495007 and Pt.H No. 517851

In the decision dated September 4, 2024 (2024 NSSC 428), the Court granted relief in both actions:

Pt.H No. 495007:

• Martina Laudahn’s Statement of Claim and Defence to Counterclaim were struck.

• Her action was dismissed.

• Judgment on the Counterclaim was granted to Chedabucto for $183,258.29, composed of:

  • $159,668.29 in damages

  • $23,590.00 in pre-judgment interest at 4% over 1348 days, reduced from 1713 days due to COVID-19 delays.

Pt.H No. 517851:

• Default judgment was entered against Carina Laudahn.

• Summary judgment was granted against Martina Laudahn.

• Her pleadings titled “Notice of Defence and Counterclaim – Claim for Trespass on the Case” were struck as abusive and unsustainable.

• Conveyances of Lots 17, 18, and 20 were declared void, and title was ordered returned to Martina Laudahn.

Carina’s refusals to accept service were overruled by the Court, which found adequate notice had been provided through affidavits and her own filings.

Costs decision – 2025 NSSC 170

On May 8, 2025, the Court issued its costs decision. Justice Patrick Murray awarded $91,113.75 in lump sum costs to Chedabucto and the Peters. The calculation followed this reasoning:

• Total legal fees incurred by Chedabucto: $150,119.57

• Claimed: $102,375.00 (approx. 68% of total)

• Awarded: $91,113.75, based on:

  • $90,000.00 in post-June 2022 costs

  • $21,125.00 (50% of $42,250.00) for pre-June 2022 non-OPCA work

  • 70% substantial indemnity plus 17% uplift due to rejected settlement offer

A formal settlement offer had been made by Chedabucto on December 22, 2022, proposing to pay Martina $10.00 and withdraw the counterclaim to resolve the matter. Martina rejected the offer.

The Court relied on Rule 77 (Costs), Rule 88 (Abuse of Process), and Meads v. Meads, 2012 ABQB 571, to support elevated cost consequences for OPCA litigation tactics. No costs were awarded against Carina Laudahn due to her limited involvement.

Conclusion

The Court concluded that Martina Laudahn’s conduct constituted an egregious abuse of process, which impaired judicial proceedings and justified the ultimate remedies. Both her main claim and her defence to the counterclaim were dismissed. In the related action, the conveyances were undone, and the pleadings of both Laudahns were rejected. Costs were awarded to compensate Chedabucto and deter future procedural abuse.