Company: NYXH
Filing Date: 2025-03-20
Form Type: F-3
Source: 0001104659-25-026217
Chunk: 106

Company: Nyxoah SA
Filing Date: 2025-03-20
Form: F-3
Chunk 106
---
 in civil and commercial matters. Consequently, a final judgment rendered by any federal or state court in the United States, whether or not predicated solely upon U.S. federal or state securities laws, would not automatically be enforceable in Belgium. Actions for the recognition and enforcement of judgments of U.S. courts are regulated by Articles 22 to 25 of the 2004 Belgian Code of Private International Law. Recognition or enforcement does not imply a review of the merits of the case and is irrespective of any reciprocity requirement. A U.S. judgment will, however, not be recognized or declared enforceable in Belgium, unless (in addition to compliance with certain technical provisions) the Belgian courts are satisfied of the following.

•

The effect of the recognition or enforcement of judgment is not manifestly incompatible with (Belgian) public order.

•

The judgment did not violate the rights of the defendant.

•

The judgment was not rendered in a matter where the parties did not freely dispose of their rights, with the sole purpose of avoiding the application of the law applicable according to Belgian international law.

•

The judgment is not subject to further recourse under U.S. law.

•

The judgment is not incompatible with a judgment rendered in Belgium or with a prior judgment rendered abroad that might be recognized in Belgium.

<div align='center'>S-31</div>

TABLE OF CONTENTS

•

The claim was not filed outside Belgium after a claim was filed in Belgium, if the claim filed in Belgium relates to the same parties and the same subject and is still pending.

•

The Belgian courts did not have exclusive jurisdiction to rule on the matter.

•

The U.S. court did not accept its jurisdiction solely on the basis of either the presence of the plaintiff or the location of goods not direct linked to the dispute in the United States.

•

The judgment did not concern the deposit or validity of intellectual property rights when the deposit or registration of those intellectual property rights was requested, done or should have been done in Belgium pursuant to international treaties.

•

The judgment did not relate to the validity, operation, dissolution, or liquidation of a legal entity that has its main seat in Belgium at the time of the petition of the U.S. court.

•

If the judgment relates to the opening, progress or closure of insolvency proceedings, it is rendered on the basis of the European Insolvency Regulation (EC Regulation No. 1346/2000 of May 29, 2000) or, if not, that (a) a decision in the principal proceedings is taken by