Whitehorse Daily Star

Judge raps conduct of lawyer, who plans appeal

The behaviour of a lawyer and business owner in a property dispute was "high-handed" and "reprehensible," says a Yukon judge.

By AP on November 3, 2008

The behaviour of a lawyer and business owner in a property dispute was "high-handed" and "reprehensible," says a Yukon judge.

Last week, Yukon Supreme Court Justice Ron Veale released his reasons for judgment on a civil suit between Francesco (Frank) Calandra, a Toronto lawyer and owner of the vacant Skky Hotel, and Whitehorse resident Winston Henley, owner of Air Ride Mobility.

The case centred around a trailer owned by Henley and stored on a piece of property originally owned by Yvonne Fradsham of Edmonton.

Calandra bought the property, located south of the Whitehorse airport on the Alaska Highway.

Soon after, he demanded Henley remove the trailer, despite the fact Henley had a written agreement with Fradsham to keep it where it stood until the spring of this year.

What followed was a back-and-forth between the two men, wherein Henley maintained his right to leave the trailer on the property free of charge.

Calandra pressed Henley to either sell the trailer to him or pay $2,500 a month rent - five times what the trailer's previous owner had paid to Fradsham.

Henley refused both options. Calandra put up a No Trespassing sign and rented out the trailer.

Henley sued Calandra. Calandra promptly counter-sued. According to Henley's lawyer, Jim Tucker, "the two lawsuits were ultimately consolidated."

The judge's decision fell firmly in Henley's favour.

"There is an old saying that a lawyer who represents himself has a fool for a client," Veale wrote in his introduction. He then chastized Calandra, who represented himself, and Fradsham for being "unable to remain objective; one of the most important assets a lawyer has to offer a client."

Veale gave Henley permission to keep his trailer on the property until next spring and ordered Calandra to pay Henley's legal costs.

He exonerated Fradsham and another woman named in the case from all responsibility.

Both, he wrote, "had no interest in being part of the court action" and that their inclusion in the case "was instigated by Mr. Calandra."

He further chided the lawyer, adding: "Their inclusion ... added to the cost and complexity of the court action."

He went on to criticize Calandra's actions leading up to the trial.

"His (Calandra's) conduct towards Mr. Henley was outrageous and quite frankly would cause any citizen to think twice about asserting their rightful ownership of the trailer and addition. The message to Mr. Henley could be none other that 'transfer the trailer to me or you will get nothing without an expensive court fight.'"

Calandra, who said he plans to appeal the judge's decision, told the Star last week he was puzzled by Veale's introduction.

"I applied for an adjournament so that my lawyer could be present," he said. Veale denied the application, and the lawyer said he had no choice but to represent himself.

Calandra said he was a bit surprised by the tone of the ruling, and not satisfied with the outcome, "but that is why we have a higher court, a court of appeal."

Although Calandra has rejected the judge's decision, he has taken his implicit advice by retaining Vancouver lawyer John Bethell to represent him in an appeal of Veale's decision.

Bethall said last week he could not comment on the details of the appeal, but did confirm he is working for Calandra. He is not working for Fradsham, Calandra's co-plaintiff in the case against Henley, he said.

Henley's lawyer said he has not been notified of any appeal.

Calandra is listed as a member on the Law Society of Yukon website, with contact information for a Toronto office. He is the owner of the still-unopened Skky Hotel, according to the Whitehorse Chamber of Commerce website.

Henley declined to comment on the decision or the pending appeal.

Comments (1)

Up 0 Down 0

Ted Parkinson on Nov 3, 2008 at 11:37 am

You write: "The case centred around a trailer owned by Henley ...". But this is incorrect usage. You cannot "centre around" something. You can "centre on" something, or "loop around it" but the phrase "centre around" is a mistake. Unfortunately, it's a mistake that is made too often in our non-copy-edited universe. Ted Parkinson.

Add your comments or reply via Twitter @whitehorsestar

In order to encourage thoughtful and responsible discussion, website comments will not be visible until a moderator approves them. Please add comments judiciously and refrain from maligning any individual or institution. Read about our user comment and privacy policies.

Your name and email address are required before your comment is posted. Otherwise, your comment will not be posted.