Executive Summary: Key Legal and Evidentiary Issues

• Nathan Kirk Dempsey, self-represented, sought leave to appeal an Interlocutory Order issued by Justice Gail Gatchalian on March 3, 2026.
   
• The grounds of appeal challenged the operational terms of that interlocutory order across four alleged categories of error.
   
• All four categories of alleged error were found to be immaterial, misguided, and based on a mischaracterization of the Motion Judge's decision.
   
• Dempsey's arguments were characterized as a collateral attack on the sealing decision of Justice John Keith, reported at 2025 NSSC 47.
   
• The Court concluded that the appeal was filed for a vexatious purpose, intended to embroil the respondents in continued litigation with no chance of success.
   
• Costs were ordered against the appellant and payable forthwith in any event of the cause.

Facts of the case

Nathan Kirk Dempsey, self-represented, filed a Notice of Appeal challenging an Interlocutory Order made by Justice Gail Gatchalian dated March 3, 2026. The respondents were the Attorney General of Nova Scotia, Pagefreezer Software Inc., and Michael Riedijk. The appeal was heard on June 17, 2026, in Halifax, Nova Scotia, before Justices Farrar, Derrick, and Beaton of the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal, with the written decision released the following day on June 18, 2026.

Policy terms or contractual clauses at issue

No specific policy terms, legislative provisions, or contractual clauses were at issue in this proceeding. The dispute concerned the scope and terms of the Interlocutory Order itself, with Dempsey attempting to expand its operational terms through appellate challenge.

Reasoning and analysis

The Court found that the appellant's Notice of Appeal and all grounds contained therein were entirely without merit and, further, completely irrelevant. The four categories of alleged error advanced by Dempsey were found to be immaterial, misguided, and based on a mischaracterization of the Motion Judge's decision. The Court characterized the appeal as a collateral attack on the sealing decision of Justice John Keith, reported at 2025 NSSC 47. The panel went further, concluding that the filing of the appeal was for a vexatious purpose — specifically, to embroil the respondents in continued litigation, causing them expense and inconvenience in addressing arguments that had no chance of success.

Ruling and overall outcome

Leave to appeal was denied. The respondents — Pagefreezer Software Inc., Michael Riedijk, and the Attorney General of Nova Scotia — were the successful parties. The Court ordered costs payable to Pagefreezer Software Inc. and Michael Riedijk in the amount of $1,000.00 inclusive of disbursements, and to the Attorney General of Nova Scotia in the amount of $500.00 inclusive of disbursements, both payable forthwith and in any event of the cause.