Today marks Day 1 back as CEO of Shape Robotics. The bankruptcy court has reversed the decision and sent the initial claims for re-judgment. We are legally back to before bankruptcy. And we intend to stay that way.
But let me be direct with you: what we have uncovered in the last 59 days is staggering.
Here is what you need to know.
The Team Is Back
The good news first. I managed to convince the most important members of my team to return. They came back today, despite having found or committed to other opportunities during the chaos of the last 59 days. That is loyalty. That is belief in what we are building.
The Iris Deal Is Alive
We had productive discussions with Iris today. I cannot share all the details yet, but by Friday you will have a full update. This deal hinges on our Nasdaq situation and the registration of my position and Aurel’s position being restored. The trustee was supposed to handle this. They have not. They refuse to cooperate, will not return calls, and only speak to our lawyer after being forced to.
The Polish Contract: 40 Million Euros Sabotaged
Sanako had a 40 million euro contract. That contract was sabotaged by the trustee and certain Sanako employees. Sanako is now bankrupt, and we are investigating every email, every discussion, everything that led to this outcome. On Friday, we meet with Bechtle. They won the tender and need a partner. We are that partner. This can still happen.
The Legal Reality
Let me be clear about our legal standing: Shape Robotics was never truly bankrupt. We had a line of credit. We had settlement agreements in place. The bankruptcy claims were never properly served to the people who mattered. The court has now sent them for re-judgment. When properly served, the answer will be simple: there was no basis for bankruptcy.
The 3.7 Million Crown Question
This is where it gets explosive.
Before the bankruptcy on November 28, 2025, Shape Robotics paid 3.7 million DKK to Danske Bank as part of a settlement agreement. The condition was clear: Danske Bank, through its lawyers Kroman Reumert, would withdraw their bankruptcy claims.
Instead, on January 5th, Kroman Reumert joined the bankruptcy proceedings. The very law firm representing Danske Bank became the trustee of Shape Robotics. In Denmark, in Poland, in Finland, in Romania, this cannot happen. You cannot be both the creditor’s lawyer and the trustee of the debtor.
In the court record, their own lawyer admitted that the 3.7 million crowns would be returned to the estate if bankruptcy was declared. The creditor information letter they sent to shareholders classified this money as a non-restricted asset at face value.
The bankruptcy has been reversed. That money belongs to Shape Robotics. We have demanded its return.
The trustee’s response? They want to deposit it under the Deposit Act and freeze it until a court decides. They are stalling. They are obstructing. And we believe they are hiding something.
The Conflict of Interest Nobody Can Ignore
Let me connect the dots:
- Kroman Reumert represents Danske Bank
- Kroman Reumert became the trustee of Shape Robotics
- The settlement money sat in Kroman Reumert’s own account, not Danske Bank’s
- They declared zero value in the company to creditors
- They now refuse to restore our CVR registration, which takes 20 minutes
- They refuse to return our funds
- Every day they delay, we lose time before the re-judgment deadline
This is not negligence. Draw your own conclusions.
What Happens Next
We have filed a board negligence claim. We are pursuing claims against the trustee. We are demanding full transparency on every action taken during those 59 days: every email, every creditor meeting, every decision.
We have approximately six weeks until the re-judgment. In that time, we must raise capital, reinstate the EGM, and execute the recovery plan. The trustee’s obstruction is not just inconvenient. It is existentially threatening to the company and every shareholder.
I will update you every single day. Everything will be documented. Everything will be made public.
The game is not over for Shape. It is over for those who thought they could dismantle this company in the dark.
Watch the full CEO Daily Brief above.
The Settlement Agreement: How Kroman Reumert Broke Their Own Deal
I am publishing the actual settlement agreement (Afviklingsaftale) signed on November 28, 2025, so you can read it yourself. Here is what it says and why it matters.
The agreement was drafted by Kroman Reumert on behalf of Danske Bank and EIFO. Shape Robotics acknowledged debts of approximately DKK 14.6 million to Danske Bank and DKK 6.2 million to EIFO. In exchange for a structured repayment plan, Section 4 of the agreement explicitly stated that Danske Bank and EIFO would withdraw their bankruptcy petition, provided the first installment of DKK 3,725,000 was received on time.
We paid that installment. On time. On November 28, 2025. To the account of Kroman Reumert, as instructed in the agreement.
Despite receiving the payment, Kroman Reumert, acting on behalf of Danske Bank and EIFO, appeared at the bankruptcy court on January 6, 2026, not to withdraw their petition, but to join it. Attorney Teis Gullitz-Wormslev stood before the court and stated that the first installment of approximately 3.7 million DKK would be returned to the estate if bankruptcy was declared. He then requested to be appointed as trustee.
The court record (Retsbog), which I am also publishing, shows that no one appeared on behalf of Shape Robotics because the bankruptcy petition was never properly served on the company. The court appointed Teis Gullitz-Wormslev as trustee, noting that he had the support of the secured creditors he himself represents.
This means the very lawyer who drafted our settlement agreement, received our payment, and was contractually obligated to withdraw the bankruptcy petition, instead walked into court and became the person in charge of dismantling our company.
Danish Law: Why This Should Not Have Happened
Section 238 of the Danish Bankruptcy Act (Konkursloven) requires that a trustee must be impartial. The law states that no one may act as trustee if they are connected to or dependent on the debtor, or if there is doubt about their impartiality.
Here is what makes Denmark unusual: unlike most European jurisdictions, Danish law does not explicitly prohibit a creditor’s lawyer from serving as trustee. In practice, creditors, particularly secured creditors, frequently nominate their own lawyer for the role, and Danish bankruptcy courts routinely accept this. The Danish Bankruptcy Council itself acknowledged this problem in a May 2025 proposal to tighten the impartiality rules, specifically because the current framework creates situations where trustees may safeguard interests that are irrelevant to the estate.
In Poland, Romania, Finland, and most other European countries, this arrangement would be flatly prohibited. A lawyer who represents a major creditor cannot simultaneously serve as the neutral administrator of the debtor’s estate. The conflict is self-evident.
In our case, the conflict goes beyond the typical Danish arrangement. The trustee did not merely represent a creditor. He represented the creditor who signed a settlement agreement with us, received our payment, was obligated to withdraw the bankruptcy, and then reversed course, joined the bankruptcy, and took control of the estate. This is not an abstract impartiality concern. It is a concrete conflict: the trustee is now evaluating assets and claims in a bankruptcy he helped create on behalf of his own client.
The creditor information letter he produced for shareholders reported zero value across virtually every asset category: zero receivables, zero inventory, zero subsidiary value, zero operating assets. All while holding DKK 3.7 million of our money.
Read the Documents Yourself
I am attaching three documents for full transparency. Read them. Share them. Form your own conclusions.
1. The Settlement Agreement (Afviklingsaftale) - signed November 28, 2025, between Shape Robotics, Danske Bank, and EIFO, drafted by Kroman Reumert. Section 4 commits the creditors to withdraw the bankruptcy petition upon receipt of the first installment.
2. Creditor Information No. 2 - issued January 26, 2026, by the trustee Teis Gullitz-Wormslev of Kroman Reumert. Reports zero value across all asset categories except the DKK 3.7 million installment returned to the estate.
3. The Court Record (Retsbog) - from January 6, 2026, documenting the bankruptcy hearing where Kroman Reumert appeared as counsel for Danske Bank/EIFO and was simultaneously appointed as trustee.
This is Shape Robotics. This is our fight. And we are just getting started.
#ShapeRobotics #SHAPE #NasdaqCopenhagen #bankruptcy #corporategovernance #trustee #DanskeBank #KromanReumert #EdTech #conflictofinterest #shareholders #investorrights #transparency #Denmark #corporatefraud #boardnegligence
