CanopyLAB and public funding: what the official 2022 reviews concluded

The authority asked the project operator whether the expected activities had been performed and whether irregularities had occurred.

After reviewing the matter, the Danish Business Authority concluded that there was no basis to assume that false information had been provided, information concealed or fraudulent conduct shown sufficient to justify a police report concerning CanopyLAB or Sahra-Josephine Hjorth.

The authority stated that it did not expect to take further action.

The authority also investigated CanopyLAB's participation in DigitaliseringsBoost.

The project operator reported that the expected activities had been performed and that it had seen CanopyLAB's developed system functioning.

The operator described the system searching the internet and other available databases for relevant material and generating a plan for how a person could acquire knowledge about a subject.

It also stated that it had not otherwise experienced irregularities in the innovation collaboration.

The authority ultimately reached the same no-basis conclusion concerning false information, concealment or fraudulent conduct.

The Danish Business Authority separately investigated CanopyLAB's participation in Zealand International, asking the operator about the company's activities and any irregularities connected with its participation.

The matter was also closed without further action.

These were government reviews, not merely denials by CanopyLAB.

In the matters actually investigated, the Danish Business Authority did not find a basis to assume false information, concealment or fraudulent conduct sufficient to justify reporting CanopyLAB or Sahra-Josephine Hjorth to the police, and stated that it did not expect to take further action.

These decisions should not be generalized to every grant, transaction or allegation concerning CanopyLAB. They are direct official evidence concerning the three projects the authority examined.