Company: PBR
Filing Date: 2025-09-05
Form Type: 424B2
Source: 0001104659-25-087755
Chunk: 176

Company: PETROBRAS - PETROLEO BRASILEIRO SA
Filing Date: 2025-09-05
Form: 424B2
Chunk 176
---
 assets, under certain circumstances, may not be subject to attachment or execution.                  |

<div align='center'>PGF</div>

PGF is duly incorporated as a private limited liability
company (besloten vennootschap met beperkte aansprakelijkheid) under the laws of the Netherlands. All of the directors of PGF reside
outside the United States. PGF has no assets and all or a substantial portion of the assets of PGF’s directors are located outside
of the United States. As a result, it may be difficult for investors to effect service of process within the United States upon PGF or
such persons or to enforce, in the United States courts, judgment against PGF or such persons or judgments obtained in such courts predicated
upon the civil liability provisions of the federal securities laws of the United States.

PGF has been advised by its special Dutch counsel,
Heussen B.V., that a judgment rendered by a federal or state court in New York, or a “New York Court,” cannot be enforced
in the Netherlands for the reason that the United States and the Netherlands currently do not have a treaty providing for the reciprocal
recognition and enforcement of judgments (other than arbitration awards) in civil and commercial matters. In order to obtain a judgment
that can be enforced in the Netherlands, the dispute will have to be re-litigated before the competent Dutch court. If a person has obtained
a final and conclusive judgment for the payment of money rendered by the New York Court which is enforceable in the United States, the
person will be required to file its claim with the court of competent jurisdiction in the Netherlands. Such party may submit to the Dutch
court the final judgement rendered by the New York Court. The Dutch court will have discretion to attach such weight to this final judgment
as it deems appropriate. The Dutch court can be expected to adjudicate substantial importance to such judgment without full re-examination
or full re-litigation of the substantive matters adjudicated thereby (marginale toetsing), to the extent (i) the New York
Court accepted jurisdiction in the matter on the basis of an internationally recognized ground to accept jurisdiction, (ii) the proceedings
before such court have complied with the principles proper procedure and fair trail (behoorlijke rechtspleging), (iii) such
judgment does not conflict with the public policy (openbare orde) of the Netherlands and (iv) such judgment not being incompatible
with a