ShareWood Switzerland AG, based in Zurich, is a company that has been selling teak, eucalyptus and balsa trees on plantations in Brazil since 2007. With a clear conscience and a contribution to climate protection, investors invested a total of around 100 million Swiss francs.
ShareWood advertised great returns. Investors were supposed to get their invested money back with an annual return of at least 6 % p.a. through thinning, deforestation and through final felling after about 20 years, thus making large profits.
However, the company has apparently miscalculated. At least for the balsa trees, no buyer was found, so that a sale became impossible.
In September 2019, ShareWood informed the investors that the balsa project had to be stopped in view of the complete lack of a sales market. In addition, the trees were to be chopped up and worked into the ground on site. This is tantamount to a total loss of the investment.
With regard to the teak trees, we know that in some cases timber revenue settlements have been made on the basis of supposed timber sales, but that the timber revenue payments have been delayed for years for inexplicable reasons.
It is also difficult to understand why the thinning out of tree plantations is delayed for years.
Current status:
In Switzerland, the Public Prosecutor's Office III of the Canton of Zurich initiated criminal proceedings against the management of ShareWood Switzerland AG, Peter Möckli and Michael Steg, on urgent suspicion of commercial fraud and violation of the Federal Act against Unfair Competition.
The Sharewood website was even blocked.
Now, in February 2022, bankruptcy proceedings were also initiated against ShareWood Switzerland AG at the Zurich District Court.
The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has now ruled on 10 February 2022 (C-595/20) on the question of the applicable law to tree purchase contracts that purchase contracts which include a lease and a contract for the provision of services and relate to trees planted on land leased for the sole purpose of harvesting those trees for profit are not "contracts having as their object rights in rem in immovable property or tenancies of immovable property".