Item 3. Key Information

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

Summary of Risk Factors

An investment in our American Depository Shares (“ADSs”) is subject to a number of risks, including risks related to our financial position and capital requirements, risks related to the discovery, development and regulatory approval of our product candidates, risks related to our reliance on third parties, risks related to commercialization of our product candidates, risks related to regulation of our industry, risks related to intellectual property, and risks related to ownership of our ADSs. Investors should carefully consider all of the information in this annual report before making an investment in the ADSs. The following list summarizes some, but not all, of these risks. Please read the information in the section entitled “Risk Factors” for a more thorough description of these and other risks.

Risks Related to our Financial Condition and Capital Requirements

Risks Related to the Discovery, Development and Regulatory Approval of Our Product Candidates

Risks Related to Our Reliance on Third Parties

5

Risks Related to Commercialization of Our Product Candidates

Risks Related to Regulation of Our Industry

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

Risks Related to Ownership of Our ADSs

Implications of Being an Emerging Growth Company and a Foreign Private Issuer

Emerging Growth Company

We are an “emerging growth company” as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012, or the JOBS Act. As such, we may take advantage of specific exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other publicly traded entities that are not emerging growth companies. These exemptions include:

As a result, we do not know if some investors will find our ADSs less attractive. The result may be a less active trading market for our ADSs, and the price of our ADSs may become more volatile.

6

We will remain an emerging growth company until the earliest of: (i) the last day of the first fiscal year in which our annual gross revenues exceed $1.07 billion; (ii) the last day of the fiscal year following the fifth anniversary of the completion of our initial public offering; (iii) the date that we become a “large accelerated filer” as defined in Rule 12b-2 under the Exchange Act, which would occur if the market value of our common equity held by non-affiliates exceeds $700 million as of the last business day of our most recently completed second fiscal quarter; or (iv) the date on which we have issued more than $1 billion in non-convertible debt securities during any three-year period.

Foreign Private Issuer

We report under the Exchange Act as a non-U.S. company with foreign private issuer status. Even after we no longer qualify as an emerging growth company, as long as we qualify as a foreign private issuer under the Exchange Act, we will be exempt from specific provisions of the Exchange Act that are applicable to U.S. domestic public companies, including:

In addition, we will not be required to file annual reports and consolidated financial statements with the SEC as promptly as U.S. domestic companies whose securities are registered under the Exchange Act, and we will not be required to comply with Regulation FD, which restricts the selective disclosure of material information.

Both foreign private issuers and emerging growth companies also are exempt from some more stringent executive compensation disclosure rules. Thus, even if we no longer qualify as an emerging growth company, but remain a foreign private issuer, we will continue to be exempt from the more stringent compensation disclosures required of companies that are neither an emerging growth company nor a foreign private issuer.

7

Investors should carefully consider the risks described below before making an investment decision. Additional risks not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial may also impair our business operations. Our business, financial condition or results of operations could be materially and adversely affected by any of these risks. The trading price and value of our ordinary shares could decline due to any of these risks, and investors may lose all or part of their investment. This Annual Report also contains forward- looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Our actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of certain factors, including the risks faced by us described below and elsewhere in this Annual Report.

Biopharmaceutical product development is a highly speculative undertaking and involves a substantial degree of risk. We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company and commenced operations in 1996. To date, we have focused primarily on performing research and development activities, establishing our intellectual property portfolio (including acquisitions, in-licensing and out-licensing), discovering potential product candidates, conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials and raising capital. Our approach to the discovery and development of product candidates is unproven, and we do not know whether we will be able to develop any products of commercial value. Our lead CNS product candidate, BNC210, is in clinical development, and our additional wholly owned CNS development programs remain in the preclinical or discovery stage. There is no guarantee that we will be able to continue the development of or advance any product candidate into further clinical trials, including to meet the capital requirements for such activities. We have no products approved for commercial sale and we have not yet demonstrated an ability to successfully obtain regulatory approvals, manufacture a commercial scale product, or arrange for a third party to do so on our behalf or conduct sales and marketing activities necessary for successful product commercialization. Consequently, any predictions made about our future success or viability may not be as accurate as they could be if we had a history of successfully developing and commercializing biopharmaceutical products.

We have incurred significant operating losses since our inception. If our product candidates are not successfully developed and approved, we may never generate any revenue. Our total comprehensive losses were A$164.0 million ($113 million) and A$173.3 million ($119.4 million) for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2021 and 2022, respectively. As of June 30, 2022, we had net assets of A$56.9 million ($39.2 million). Substantially all of our losses have resulted from expenses incurred in connection with our research and development programs, preclinical studies, clinical trials and from general and administrative costs associated with our operations. Our product candidates will require substantial additional development time and resources before we would be able to apply for or receive regulatory approvals and begin generating revenue from product sales. We expect to continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future, and we anticipate these losses will increase substantially as we conduct our ongoing and planned preclinical studies and clinical trials, initiate and scale our production capacity, seek regulatory approvals for our product candidates, hire additional personnel, obtain and protect our intellectual property, initiate further research and development and incur additional costs for commercialization or to expand our pipeline of product candidates.

To become and remain profitable, we must succeed in developing and eventually commercializing, licensing and/or acquiring products that generate significant revenue. This will require us to be successful in a range of challenging activities, including completing preclinical studies and clinical trials of our product candidates, obtaining regulatory approval for these product candidates and manufacturing, marketing and selling any products for which we may obtain regulatory approval. We are only in the preliminary stages of some of these activities. We may never succeed in these activities and, even if we do, may never generate revenues that are significant enough to achieve profitability. We may also encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays and other unknown factors that may

8

adversely affect our business. Even if we do achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability. If we fail to become and remain profitable, the value of our ADSs could be depressed and our ability to raise capital, expand our business, maintain our research and development efforts, diversify our product candidates or continue our operations could be impaired, and some or all of the value of our ADSs could be lost.

The development of biopharmaceutical product candidates is capital intensive. Since our inception, we have used substantial amounts of cash to fund our operations and we expect our expenses to increase in connection with our ongoing activities during the next several years, particularly as we conduct our ongoing and planned clinical trials of BNC210, continue research and development for any additional product candidates, and seek regulatory approval for our current product candidates and any future product candidates we may develop. In addition, if, following approval, we commercialize BNC210 or any other product candidates, we may need to make royalty or other payments to our licensors and other third parties. Further, in connection with the termination of our previous research and license agreement with Ironwood Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Ironwood”), we are obligated to pay Ironwood a low single digit royalty on the net sales of BNC210, if commercialized. Furthermore, if and to the extent we seek to acquire or in-license additional product candidates or rights in the future, we may be required to make significant upfront payments, milestone payments, licensing payments, royalty payments and/or other types of payments. If we obtain regulatory approval for any of our product candidates, we also expect to incur significant commercialization expenses related to product manufacturing, marketing, sales and distribution. Because the outcome of any clinical trial or preclinical study is highly uncertain, we cannot reasonably estimate the actual amounts necessary to successfully complete the development and commercialization of our product candidates. Furthermore, we have incurred and expect to continue to incur significant costs associated with operating as a U.S. public company. Accordingly, we will need to obtain substantial additional funding in connection with our continuing operations. If we are unable to raise capital or find alternative sources of financing when needed or on attractive terms, we could be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate our research and development programs or any future commercialization efforts.

We had cash and cash equivalents of A$33.6 million ($23.1 million) as of June 30, 2022. Our operating plans and other demands on our cash resources may change as a result of many factors currently unknown to us, and we may need to seek additional funds sooner than planned, through public or private equity or debt financings or other capital sources, including potentially collaborations, licenses and other similar arrangements. In addition, we may seek additional capital due to favorable market conditions or strategic considerations even if we believe we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the capital markets may affect the availability, amount and type of financing available to us in the future. Attempting to secure additional financing may divert our management from our day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our ability to develop our product candidates.

Our future financing requirements will depend on many factors, including:

9

Conducting clinical trials (especially if and as we move into Phase 3 clinical trials which are typically substantially more expensive and of longer duration) and preclinical studies is a time consuming, expensive and uncertain process that takes years to complete, and we may never generate the necessary data or results required to obtain regulatory approval and achieve product sales. In addition, our product candidates, if approved, may not achieve commercial success. Our commercial revenues, if any, will be derived from sales of products that we do not expect to be commercially available for many years, if at all.

Accordingly, we will need to continue to rely on additional financing to achieve our business objectives. Adequate additional financing may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all. If we are unable to raise capital when needed or on attractive terms, we would be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate our research and development programs, future commercialization efforts or other operations.

Until such time, if ever, as we can generate substantial revenues, we expect to finance our business and operational needs through equity offerings, debt financings or other financing sources, including potentially collaborations, licenses and other similar arrangements. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, investors’ ownership interest will be diluted, and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect investors’ rights as a holder of our ADSs. Debt financing and preferred equity financing, if available, may involve agreements that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures or declaring dividends.

If we raise funds through future collaborations, licenses and other similar arrangements, we may have to relinquish valuable rights to our future revenue streams, research programs or product candidates or grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us and/or that may reduce the value of our ADSs. We may also lose control of the development of our products or product candidates, such as the pace and scope of clinical trials, as a result of such third-party arrangements. If we are unable to raise funds through equity or debt financings when needed, we may be required to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our product development or future commercialization efforts or grant rights to develop and market products or product candidates that we would otherwise prefer to develop and market ourselves.

10

Our operating results have fluctuated significantly in the past and may continue to do so in the future. Fluctuations in our operating results may occur due to a variety of factors, many of which are out of our control and may be difficult to predict, including:

The cumulative effect of these factors could result in large fluctuations and unpredictability in our operating results. As a result, comparisons of our operating results on a period-to-period basis may not be meaningful. Investors should not rely on our past results as an indication of future performance. This variability and unpredictability could also result in our failing to meet the expectations of industry or financial analysts or investors for any period. If our revenue or operating results fall below the expectations of analysts or investors or below any guidelines we may provide to the market, or if the guidelines we provide to the market are below the expectations of analysts or investors, this could adversely affect the trading price of our ADSs. Such a decline could occur even when we have met any previously publicly stated revenue or earnings guidance we may provide.

We have historically received entitlements through the Australian Government’s Research and Development Tax Incentive program, under which the Australian Government currently provides a refundable tax offset, payable as a cash incentive, of 43.5% of eligible approved research and development expenditures by Australian entities with an “aggregated turnover” of less than A$20 million and an additional tax deduction of 8.5 to 16.5% of eligible approved research and development expenditures if “aggregated turnover” is greater than A$20 million. For the fiscal years ended June 30, 2021 and 2022, we recognized a refundable tax offset of approximately A$0.9 million and A$5.8 million, respectively. Entitlement to tax offsets under the Research and Development Tax Incentive for eligible research and development purposes is based on an annual application to the Australian Government. For overseas activities that have a significant scientific link to the Australian activities, the expenditure in Australia needs to be greater than the expected overseas expenditure to be eligible.

Payments under this program are available for our research and development activities in Australia, as well as certain activities conducted overseas that are required to be approved by AusIndustry, a branch of the Australian Government. In June 2021, we submitted an application to AusIndustry to seek approval of our current overseas activities relating to BNC210 as eligible expenditure under this program. On

11

September 8, 2021, AusIndustry informed us that they would not be approving our application for our current overseas activities relating to BNC210. On October 6, 2021, we lodged a request to AusIndustry for internal review of the findings decision on our application. On October 13, 2022 AusIndustry informed us that they would conduct an internal review of the findings decision. On June 6, 2022 AusIndustry informed us that the initial decision had been overturned and our application to AusIndustry to seek approval of our current overseas activities relating to BNC210 as eligible expenditure under this program was approved. On June 14, 2022 we lodged our tax return for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2021, which incorporated the research and development tax incentive schedule, and on August 5, 2022, we received approximately $2 million the research and development tax incentive refund relating to the financial year ended June 30, 2021, which as at June 30, 2022 is included as part of the Research and Development Incentives Receivable, in the Consolidated Statement of Financial Position. In the event of our research and development expenditures being deemed “ineligible,” then our incentives would decrease, and our future cash flows would be negatively affected. In addition, the Australian Government may modify the requirements of, reduce the amounts of the tax offset entitlement under, or discontinue the Research and Development Tax Incentive program. If the Research and Development Tax Incentive program was discontinued, or if the tax incentive rate was reduced, it would have a negative effect on the size of future refundable tax offsets and our future cash flows.

We have substantial carried forward tax losses, which may not be available to offset future gains, if any. In order for an Australian corporate tax payor to carry forward and utilize tax losses, the taxpayor must pass either the “continuity of ownership test” or, if it fails such test, the “business continuity test” in respect of relevant tax losses. We have not carried out any analysis as to whether we have met the continuity of ownership test or, failing such test, the business continuity test over relevant periods. In addition, shareholding changes may result in a significant ownership change for us under Australian tax law. It is therefore uncertain whether any of our losses carried forward as of June 30, 2022 will be available to be carried forward and available to offset our assessable income, if any, in future periods.

While inflation in the United States has been relatively low in recent years, during 2021 and 2022, the economy in the United States encountered a material level of inflation. The impact of COVID-19, geopolitical developments such as the Russia-Ukraine conflict and global supply chain disruptions continue to increase uncertainty in the outlook of near-term and long-term economic activity, including whether inflation will continue and how long, and at what rate. Increases in inflation raise our costs for commodities, labor, materials and services and other costs required to grow and operate our business, and failure to secure these on reasonable terms may adversely impact our financial condition. Additionally, increases in inflation, along with the uncertainties surrounding COVID-19, geopolitical developments and global supply chain disruptions, have caused, and may in the future cause, global economic uncertainty and uncertainty about the interest rate environment. A failure to adequately respond to these risks could have a material adverse impact on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

In order to obtain FDA approval to market a new small molecule product, we must demonstrate the safety and efficacy of our product candidates in humans to the satisfaction of the FDA. To meet these requirements, we will have to conduct adequate and well-controlled clinical trials.

12

Conducting preclinical testing and clinical trials is a lengthy, time-consuming and expensive process and is subject to uncertainty. Despite promising preclinical or clinical results, any product candidate can unexpectedly fail at any stage of preclinical or clinical development. The historical failure rate for product candidates in our industry is high. The length of time may vary substantially according to the type, complexity and novelty of the program, and often can be several years or more per program. Delays associated with programs for which we are directly conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials may cause us to incur additional operating expenses. The commencement and rate of completion of preclinical studies and clinical trials for a product candidate may be delayed by many factors, including, for example:

13

Further, conducting clinical trials in foreign countries for our product candidates, as in our ongoing clinical trials, presents additional risks that may delay completion of our clinical trials. These risks include the failure of enrolled patients in foreign countries to adhere to the clinical protocol as a result of differences in healthcare services or cultural customs, managing additional administrative burdens associated with foreign regulatory schemes, as well as political and economic risks relevant to such foreign countries.

Delays or failure in the completion of any preclinical studies or clinical trials of our product candidates will increase our costs, slow down our product candidate development and approval process and delay or potentially jeopardize our ability to commence product sales and generate product revenue. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of our product candidates. Any delays to or failure in our preclinical studies or clinical trials that occur as a result could shorten any period during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize our product candidates and our competitors may be able to bring products to market before we do, and the commercial viability of our product candidates could be significantly reduced. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

Our ability to become profitable depends upon our ability to generate revenue. To date we have not generated any sales revenue from our product candidates, and we do not expect to generate any revenue from the sale of drugs in the near future. We do not expect to generate revenue from product sales unless and until we complete the development of, obtain marketing approval for, and begin to sell, one or more of our product candidates. We are also unable to predict when, if ever, we will be able to generate revenue from such product candidates due to the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with drug development, including the uncertainty of:

14

We expect to incur significant sales and marketing costs as we prepare to commercialize our current or future product candidates. Even if we initiate and successfully complete pivotal or registration-enabling clinical trials of our current or future product candidates, and our current or future product candidates are approved for commercial sale, and despite expending these costs, our current or future product candidates may not be commercially successful. We may not achieve profitability soon after generating drug sales, if ever. If we are unable to generate revenue, we will not become profitable and may be unable to continue operations without continued funding.

We may not be able to initiate or continue our ongoing or planned clinical trials on a timely basis or at all for our product candidates if we are unable to recruit, enroll and retain a sufficient number of eligible patients to participate in these trials as required by the FDA or similar regulatory authorities outside the U.S. Patient enrollment is a significant factor in the timing of clinical trials. Our ability to enroll eligible patients may be limited or may result in slower enrollment than we anticipate.

Moreover, some of our clinical trials will compete with other clinical trials that are in the same therapeutic areas as our current or future product candidates, and this competition reduces the number and types of patients available to us, as some patients who would otherwise be eligible for our clinical trials may instead enroll in clinical trials of our competitors’ current or future product candidates. Because the number of qualified clinical investigators and clinical trial sites is limited, we expect to conduct some of our clinical trials at the same clinical trial sites that some of our competitors use, which will reduce the number of patients who are available for our clinical trials at such clinical trial sites. In addition, there may be limited patient pools from which to draw for clinical studies. In addition to the rarity of some diseases, the eligibility criteria of our clinical studies may further limit the pool of available study participants as we will require that patients have specific characteristics that we can measure or to assure their disease is either severe enough or not too advanced to include them in a study.

Patient enrollment for any of our current or future clinical trials may be affected by other factors including:

15

These factors may make it difficult for us to enroll enough patients to complete our clinical trials in a timely and cost-effective manner. Our inability to enroll a sufficient number of patients for our clinical trials would result in significant delays or may require us to abandon one or more clinical trials altogether. Enrollment delays in our clinical trials may result in increased development costs for our product candidates and jeopardize our ability to obtain marketing approval for the sale of our product candidates. Furthermore, even if we are able to enroll a sufficient number of patients for our clinical trials, we may have difficulty maintaining participation in our clinical trials through the treatment and any follow-up periods.

From time to time, we may publicly disclose interim, topline or preliminary data from our preclinical studies and clinical trials, which is based on a preliminary analysis of then-available data, and the results and related findings and conclusions are subject to change following a more comprehensive review of the data related to the particular study or trial. We also make assumptions, estimations, calculations and conclusions as part of our analyses of data, and we may not have received or had the opportunity to fully and carefully evaluate all data. Moreover, caution should be exercised in drawing any conclusions from a comparison of data that does not come from head-to-head analysis. As a result, the interim, topline or preliminary results that we report may differ from future results of the same studies or clinical trials, or different conclusions or considerations may qualify such results, once additional data have been received and fully evaluated. Interim, topline or preliminary data also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary data we previously published. As a result, such data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available, as such interim, topline or preliminary data are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as participant enrollment continues and more participant data become available or as participants from our clinical trials continue other treatments for their disease. Adverse differences between preliminary, interim or topline data and final data could significantly harm our business prospects. Moreover, favorable results in earlier preclinical studies or clinical trials do not necessarily predict favorable results in subsequent studies or trials.

Further, others, including regulatory authorities, may not accept or agree with our assumptions, estimates, calculations, conclusions or analyses or may interpret or weigh the importance of data differently, which could impact the value of the particular program, the approvability or commercialization of the particular product candidate or product and our ADSs. In addition, the information we choose to publicly disclose regarding a particular study or clinical trial is based on what is typically extensive information, and investors or others may not agree with what we determine is material or otherwise appropriate information to include in our disclosure, and any information we determine not to disclose may ultimately be deemed significant with respect to future decisions, conclusions, views, activities or otherwise regarding a particular product, product candidate or our business. If the interim, topline or preliminary data that we report differ from actual results, or if others, including regulatory authorities, disagree with the conclusions reached, our ability to obtain approval for, and commercialize, our product candidates may be harmed, which could harm our business, operating results, prospects or financial condition.

16

Our current or future product candidates and the activities associated with their development and commercialization, including their design, testing, manufacture, safety, efficacy, recordkeeping, labeling, storage, approval, advertising, promotion, sale, distribution, import and export, are subject to comprehensive regulation by the FDA and other regulatory agencies in the U.S. and by comparable authorities in other countries. Before we can commercialize any of our current or future product candidates, we must obtain marketing approval from the regulatory authorities in the relevant jurisdictions. We have not received approval to market any of our current or future product candidates from regulatory authorities in any jurisdiction, and it is possible that none of our current product candidates, nor any product candidates we may seek to develop in the future, will ever obtain regulatory approval. Securing regulatory approval requires the submission of extensive preclinical and clinical data and supporting information to the various regulatory authorities for each therapeutic indication to establish the product candidate’s safety and efficacy. Securing regulatory approval also requires the submission of information about the drug manufacturing process to, and inspection of manufacturing facilities by, the relevant regulatory authority. Our current or future product candidates may not be effective, may be only moderately effective or may prove to have undesirable or unintended side effects, toxicities or other characteristics that may preclude our obtaining marketing approval or prevent or limit commercial use. In addition, even if we believe that our trials demonstrate the safety and/or effectiveness of a product candidature, regulatory authorities may not agree with our interpretation of the results of our trials and conclude that the data are not adequate to support approval.

In addition, even if we were to obtain approval, regulatory authorities may approve any of our current or future product candidates for fewer or more limited indications than we request, may not approve the price we intend to charge for our drugs, may grant approval contingent on the performance of costly post-marketing clinical trials, or may approve a product candidate with a label that does not include the labeling claims necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of that product candidate. Any of the foregoing scenarios could materially harm the commercial prospects for our current or future product candidates.

If we experience delays in obtaining approval or if we fail to obtain approval of our current or future product candidates, the commercial prospects for our current or future product candidates may be harmed and our ability to generate revenues will be materially impaired.

Undesirable side effects caused by our current or future product candidates could cause us to interrupt, delay or halt preclinical studies or could cause us or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials and could result in a more restrictive label or the delay or denial of regulatory approval by the FDA or other regulatory authorities for such products. It is likely that there may be adverse side effects associated with the use of our product candidates. To date, patients treated with BNC210 have experienced drug-related side effects including headaches, somnolence and nausea. There is also the potential risk of delayed adverse events following treatment using any of our current or future product candidates.

If unacceptable side effects arise in the development of our product candidates, we, the FDA, the IRBs at the institutions in which our studies are conducted, or the data safety monitoring board, could suspend or terminate our clinical trials or the FDA or comparable regulatory authorities could order us to cease clinical trials or deny approval of our product candidates for any or all targeted indications. Treatment-related side effects could also affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled patients to complete the trial or result in potential drug liability claims. In addition, these side effects may not be appropriately recognized or managed by the treating medical staff. We expect to have to train medical personnel using our product candidates to understand the side effect profiles for our clinical trials and upon any

17

commercialization of any of our product candidates. Inadequate training in recognizing or managing the potential side effects of our product candidates could result in patient injury or death. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

Further, our current or future product candidates could cause undesirable side effects in clinical trials related to on-target toxicity. If on-target toxicity is observed, or if our current or future product candidates have characteristics that are unexpected, we may need to abandon their development or limit development to more narrow uses or subpopulations in which the undesirable side effects or other characteristics are less prevalent, less severe or more acceptable from a risk-benefit perspective. Many compounds that initially showed promise in early-stage testing have later been found to cause side effects that prevented further development of the compound.

In addition, clinical trials by their nature utilize a sample of the potential patient population. With a limited number of patients and limited duration of exposure, rare and severe side effects of our current or future product candidates may only be uncovered with a significantly larger number of patients exposed to the product candidate. In any such event, our studies could be suspended or terminated and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities could order us to cease further development of or deny approval of our product candidates for any or all targeted indications. The side effects experienced could affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled subjects to complete the study or result in potential product liability claims. Moreover, if we elect, or are required, not to initiate, or to delay, suspend or terminate any future clinical trial of any of our product candidates, the commercial prospects of such product candidates may be harmed and our ability to generate product revenues from any of these product candidates may be delayed or eliminated. Any of these occurrences may harm our ability to develop other product candidates, and may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

In addition, if our current or future product candidates receive marketing approval and we or others identify undesirable side effects caused by such current or future product candidates after such approval, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including:

These events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the affected product candidates and could substantially increase the costs of commercializing our current or future product

18

candidates, if approved, and significantly impact our ability to successfully commercialize our current or future product candidates and generate revenues.

We have obtained a Fast Track designation for BNC210 for the treatment of PTSD and other trauma-related and stressor-related disorders as well as for the acute treatment of anxiety in SAD patients and other anxiety-related disorders and may seek Breakthrough Therapy designations. We may also seek Fast Track designation or Breakthrough Therapy designation for one or more of our other current or future product candidates.

The sponsor of a product candidate with Fast Track designation has opportunities for more frequent interactions with the applicable FDA review team during product development and, once an NDA is submitted, the product candidate may be eligible for priority review. Such product candidate may also be eligible for rolling review, where the FDA may consider for review sections of the NDA on a rolling basis before the complete application is submitted, if the sponsor provides a schedule for the submission of the sections of the NDA, the FDA agrees to accept sections of the NDA and determines that the schedule is acceptable, and the sponsor pays any required user fees upon submission of the first section of the NDA. A Breakthrough Therapy is defined as a drug that is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition, and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. For drugs that have been designated as Breakthrough Therapies, interaction and communication between the FDA and the sponsor of the trial can help to identify the most efficient path for clinical development while minimizing the number of patients placed in ineffective control regimens. Product candidates designated as Breakthrough Therapies by the FDA may also be eligible for priority review and accelerated approval. Designation as a Breakthrough Therapy is within the discretion of the FDA. Accordingly, even if we believe one of our current or future product candidates meets the criteria for designation as a Fast Track or Breakthrough Therapy designation, the FDA may disagree and instead determine not to make such designation. In any event, the receipt of a Fast Track or Breakthrough Therapy designation for a current or future product candidate may not result in a faster development process, review or approval compared to drugs considered for approval under conventional FDA procedures and does not assure ultimate approval by the FDA. In addition, even if one or more of our current or future product candidates qualify as Breakthrough Therapies, the FDA may later decide that such product candidates no longer meet the conditions for qualification and rescind the designation or decide that the time period for FDA review or approval will not be shortened.

The precise incidence and prevalence for the indications being pursued for our current and future product candidates is currently unknown. Our projections of both the number of people who have these diseases, as well as the subset of people with these diseases who have the potential to benefit from treatment with our product candidates, are based on estimates. The total addressable market opportunity for these product candidates and future product candidates will ultimately depend upon, among other things, each product candidate’s proven safety and efficacy, the diagnosis criteria included in the final label for each, whether our product candidates are approved for sale for these indications, acceptance by the medical community and patient access, product pricing and reimbursement. The number of patients for our product candidates in the U.S. and elsewhere may turn out to be lower than expected, patients may not be otherwise amenable to treatment with our products, or new patients may become increasingly difficult

19

to identify or gain access to, all of which would adversely affect our results of operations and our business.

If the FDA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority approves any of our current or future product candidates, the manufacturing processes, labeling, packaging, distribution, adverse event reporting, storage, advertising, promotion and recordkeeping for the drug will be subject to extensive and ongoing regulatory requirements. These requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, registration requirements, and continued compliance with cGMPs and GCPs for any clinical trials that we conduct post-approval. For certain commercial prescription drug products, manufacturers and other parties involved in the supply chain must also meet chain of distribution requirements and build electronic, interoperable systems for product tracking and tracing and for notifying the FDA of counterfeit, diverted, stolen and intentionally adulterated products or other products that are otherwise unfit for distribution in the U.S. Any regulatory approvals that we receive for our current or future product candidates may also be subject to limitations on the approved indicated uses for which the drug may be marketed or to the conditions of approval, or contain requirements for potentially costly post-marketing testing, including Phase 4 clinical trials, and surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the drug. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with a drug, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with our third-party manufacturers or manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in, among other things:

The occurrence of any event or penalty described above may inhibit our ability to commercialize our product candidates and generate revenue and could require us to expend significant time and resources in response and could generate negative publicity

The FDA’s and other regulatory authorities’ policies may change and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of our current or future product candidates. We also cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained, which would adversely affect our business, prospects and ability to achieve or sustain profitability.

We plan to seek regulatory approval of our current or future product candidates outside of the United States. Obtaining and maintaining regulatory approval of our product candidates in one jurisdiction does not guarantee that we will be able to obtain or maintain regulatory approval in any other jurisdiction.

20

For example, even if the FDA grants marketing approval of a product candidate, we may not obtain approvals in other jurisdictions, and comparable regulatory authorities in foreign jurisdictions must also approve the manufacturing, marketing and promotion and reimbursement of the product candidate in those countries. However, a failure or delay in obtaining marketing approval in one jurisdiction may have a negative effect on the regulatory approval process in others. Approval procedures vary among countries and can involve additional product candidate testing and administrative review periods different from those in the United States. The time required to obtain approvals in other countries might differ substantially from that required to obtain FDA approval. The marketing approval processes in other countries generally implicate all of the risks detailed above regarding FDA approval in the United States as well as other risks. In particular, in many countries outside of the United States, products must receive pricing and reimbursement approval before the product can be commercialized. Obtaining this approval can result in substantial delays in bringing products to market in such countries.

Obtaining foreign regulatory approvals and establishing and maintaining compliance with foreign regulatory requirements could result in significant delays, difficulties and costs for us and could delay or prevent the introduction of our products in certain countries. If we or any future collaborator fail to comply with regulatory requirements in international markets or fail to receive applicable marketing approvals, it would reduce the size of our potential market, which could have a material adverse impact on our business, results of operations and prospects.

The ability of the FDA to review and approve new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, ability to hire and retain key personnel, and accept the payment of user fees, and statutory, regulatory and policy changes and other events that may otherwise affect the FDA’s ability to perform routine functions. Average review times at the agency FDA have fluctuated in recent years as a result. In addition, government funding of the SEC and other government agencies on which our operations may rely, including those that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable.

Disruptions at the FDA, patent offices in the United States and abroad and other agencies caused by funding shortages or global health concerns may also slow the time necessary for new or modified products to be developed, approved, or commercialized, which would adversely affect our business. For example, in recent years, including for 35 days beginning on December 22, 2018, the U.S. government shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA and the SEC, had to furlough critical employees and stop critical activities.

Separately, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, on March 10, 2020 the FDA announced its intention to postpone most inspections of foreign manufacturing facilities and products, and on March 18, 2020 the FDA temporarily postponed routine surveillance inspections of domestic manufacturing facilities. Subsequently, on July 10, 2020, the FDA announced its intention to resume certain on-site inspections of domestic manufacturing facilities subject to a risk-based prioritization system. Additionally, on April 15, 2021, the FDA began conducting voluntary remote interactive evaluations of certain drug manufacturing facilities and clinical research sites, among other facilities in circumstances where the FDA determines that such remote evaluation would be appropriate based on mission needs and travel limitations. In May 2021, the FDA outlined a detailed plan to move toward a more consistent state of inspectional operations, and in July 2021, the FDA resumed standard inspectional operations of domestic facilities. Since that time, the FDA has continued to monitor and implement changes to its inspectional activities to ensure the safety of its employees and those of the firms it regulates as it adapts to the evolving COVID-19 pandemic. Regulatory authorities outside the United States may adopt similar restrictions or other policy measures in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, or if global health concerns continue to prevent the FDA or other regulatory authorities from conducting their

21

regular inspections, reviews or other regulatory activities, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. Further, in our operations as a U.S. public company, future government shutdowns or delays could impact our ability to access the public markets and obtain necessary capital in order to properly capitalize and continue our operations.

We have conducted and may in the future choose to conduct one or more of our clinical trials outside the United States, including in Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, France and the United Kingdom. The acceptance of study data from clinical trials conducted outside the United States or another jurisdiction by the FDA or applicable foreign regulatory authority may be subject to certain conditions. In cases where data from foreign clinical trials are intended to serve as the basis for marketing approval in the United States, the FDA will not approve the application on the basis of foreign data alone unless the following are true: (i) the data are applicable to the United States population and United States medical practice; (ii) the studies were performed by clinical investigators of recognized competence and pursuant to GCP regulations; and (iii) the data are considered valid without the need for an on-site inspection by the FDA or, if the FDA considers such an inspection to be necessary, the FDA is able to validate the data through an on-site inspection or other appropriate means. Additionally, the FDA’s clinical trial requirements, including sufficient size of patient populations and statistical powering, must be met. In addition, even where the foreign study data are not intended to serve as the sole basis for approval, the FDA will not accept the data as support for an application for marketing approval unless the study is well-designed and well-conducted in accordance with GCP and the FDA is able to validate the data from the study through an onsite inspection if deemed necessary. Many foreign regulatory bodies have similar requirements. In addition, such foreign studies would be subject to the applicable local laws of the foreign jurisdictions where the studies are conducted. There can be no assurance the FDA or applicable foreign regulatory authority will accept data from trials conducted outside of the United States or the applicable jurisdiction. If the FDA or any applicable foreign regulatory authority does not accept such data, it would result in the need for additional trials, which would be costly and time-consuming and delay aspects of our business plan, and which may result in our product candidates not receiving approval for commercialization in the applicable jurisdiction.

Therapies containing controlled substances may generate public controversy. Opponents of these therapies may seek restrictions on marketing and withdrawal of any regulatory approvals. In addition, these opponents may seek to generate negative publicity in an effort to persuade the medical community to reject these therapies. For example, we have a memorandum of understanding with EmpathBio Inc. (“EmpathBio”) to conduct preclinical feasibility studies to evaluate a combination of EMP-01, an MDMA derivative, and BNC210 as an adjunct to behavioral therapy for the treatment of PTSD. As a result, we may face media-communicated criticism directed at the use of BNC210 with EMP-01. Adverse publicity from MDMA misuse may adversely affect the commercial success or market penetration achievable by any combination therapy of BNC210 and EMP-01. Anti-psychedelic protests have historically occurred and may occur in the future and generate media coverage. Political pressures and adverse publicity could lead to delays in, and increased expenses for, and limit or restrict the introduction and marketing of any therapeutic candidates that are used in combination with MDMA or an MDMA derivative.

22

The success of our business depends primarily on our ability to identify, develop and commercialize one or more product candidates. We have ongoing Phase 2 clinical trials of BNC210 for PTSD and SAD.

We must balance our limited financial and managerial resources between these and other product candidates and focus on clinical programs and product candidates for the indications that take advantage of our team’s deep expertise and knowledge and that we believe are the most scientifically and commercially promising. Our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail to capitalize on viable commercial drugs or profitable market opportunities. In addition, we may spend valuable time and managerial and financial resources on clinical programs and product candidates for specific indications that ultimately do not yield any clinically or commercially viable drugs. If we do not accurately evaluate the clinical and commercial potential or target market for a particular product candidate, we may relinquish valuable rights to that product candidate through collaboration, licensing or other royalty arrangements in situations where it would have been more advantageous for us to retain sole rights to development and commercialization or miss out on the commercial opportunity entirely. This would adversely impact our business strategy and our financial position.

We are highly dependent on the members of our senior management and scientific staff, particularly our Executive Chairman, Dr. Errol De Souza, who is critical across multiple functions of our company, the loss of whose services could adversely affect the achievement of planned development objectives. We will need to hire and retain qualified personnel and could experience difficulty attracting and retaining such employees in the future. Competition for qualified personnel in the biotechnology and pharmaceuticals fields is intense due to the limited number of individuals who possess the skills and experience required by our industry. As such, we could have difficulty attracting experienced personnel to our company and may be required to expend significant financial resources in our employee recruitment and retention efforts. Further, because we are located in Australia and may seek to retain employees in the United States, we may have additional difficulties attracting personnel to work intercontinentally.

For us to further expand our drug development plans, we will need to hire additional qualified personnel. We may not be able to attract and retain personnel on acceptable terms, given the competition for such personnel among biotechnology, pharmaceutical and healthcare companies, universities and non-profit research institutions. Although we may be successful in attracting and retaining suitably qualified scientific and medical personnel, there can be no assurance that we will be able to attract and retain such personnel on acceptable terms given the competition for experienced scientists and clinicians from numerous pharmaceutical and chemical companies, specialized biotechnology firms, universities and other research institutions. Our failure to do so could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects, and the trading price of our ADSs may decline.

Our internal computer systems and those of our third-party CROs and other contractors and consultants are vulnerable to damage from computer viruses, unauthorized access, natural disasters, terrorism, war and telecommunication and electrical failures. Attacks upon information technology systems are increasing in their frequency, levels of persistence, sophistication and intensity, and are being conducted by sophisticated and organized groups and individuals with a wide range of motives and expertise. As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, we may also face increased cybersecurity risks due to our reliance on internet technology and the number of our employees who are working remotely, which may create additional opportunities for cybercriminals to exploit vulnerabilities. Furthermore, because the techniques used to obtain unauthorized access to, or to sabotage, systems change frequently and often are not recognized until launched against a target, we may be unable to anticipate these techniques or implement adequate preventative measures. We may also experience security breaches that may remain

23

undetected for an extended period. While we do not believe we have experienced any such system failure, accident or security breach to date, if such an event were to occur, it could result in a material disruption of our programs. For example, the loss of clinical trial data from completed or ongoing clinical trials for any of our product candidates could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts, and the loss of research data could result in delays of our research and development efforts and it would be expensive to recover or reproduce the data. We have also outsourced elements of our information technology infrastructure, and as a result a number of third-party vendors may or could have access to our confidential information. If our third-party vendors fail to protect their information technology systems and our confidential and proprietary information, we may be vulnerable to disruptions in service and unauthorized access to our confidential or proprietary information and we could incur liability and reputational damage. To the extent that any disruption or security breach results in a loss of or damage to our data or applications, or inappropriate disclosure of confidential or proprietary information, we could incur liability and the further development of our product candidates could be delayed.

We engage extensively in international operations, which include seeking regulatory approval for certain of our product candidates in foreign jurisdictions. We expect that we are or will be subject to additional risks related to entering into these international business markets and relationships, including:

From time to time, we may pursue strategic transactions, such as acquisitions of companies, asset purchases, and in-licensing or out-licensing of drugs, product candidates or technologies. For example, in September 2012, we acquired Eclipse Therapeutics, Inc., a private biotechnology company. Additional potential transactions that we may consider include spin-offs, strategic partnerships, joint ventures, restructurings, divestitures, business combinations and investments. Any such transaction may require us to incur non-recurring or other charges, may increase our near- and long-term expenditures and may pose significant integration challenges or distract our senior management or disrupt our business, which could adversely affect our operations and financial results. For example, these transactions may entail numerous operational and financial risks, including:

24

Accordingly, although we cannot be certain that we will undertake or successfully complete any transactions of the nature described above, any transactions that we do complete may be subject to the foregoing or other risks, and could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Clinical testing of product candidates is expensive and can take a substantial period of time to complete. Clinical trial outcomes are inherently uncertain, and failure can occur at any time during the clinical development process. Success in preclinical studies and early clinical trials does not ensure that later clinical trials will be successful. A number of companies in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries have suffered significant setbacks in clinical trials even after promising results in earlier preclinical studies or clinical trials. These setbacks have been caused by, among other things, preclinical findings made while clinical trials were underway and safety or efficacy observations made in clinical trials, including previously unreported adverse events. The results of preclinical studies and early clinical trials of our product candidates may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials. Product candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy traits despite having progressed through preclinical and initial clinical trials. Notwithstanding any potential promising results in earlier studies, we cannot be certain that we will not face similar setbacks. Even if our clinical trials are completed, the results may not be sufficient to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates.

Clinical trials can be halted or delayed for a variety of reasons, including those related to:

25

We could also encounter delays if a clinical trial is suspended or terminated by us, by our collaborators, by the IRBs of the institutions in which such trial is being conducted, by any data safety monitoring board for such trial, or by the ethics committees, FDA or other regulatory authorities. Such authorities may impose a suspension or termination due to a number of factors, including: failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements, such as the current GCPs, or our clinical protocols, inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial site by the FDA or other regulatory authorities resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold, product candidate manufacturing problems, unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects, failure to demonstrate a benefit from using a drug, changes in governmental regulations or administrative actions or lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial. In addition, delays can occur due to safety concerns arising from trials or other clinical data regarding another company’s product candidate in the same compound class as one of ours.

Moreover, clinical investigators for our clinical trials may serve as scientific advisors or consultants to us from time to time and receive compensation in connection with such services. Under certain circumstances, we may be required to report some of these relationships to the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. The FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may conclude that a financial relationship between us and a principal investigator has created a conflict of interest or otherwise affected interpretation of the study. The FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may therefore question the integrity of the data generated at the applicable clinical trial site and the utility of the clinical trial itself may be jeopardized. This could result in a delay in approval, or rejection, of our marketing applications by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, as the case may be, and may ultimately lead to the denial of marketing approval of one or more of our product candidates.

If we or our collaborators experience delays in the completion of, or termination of, any clinical trial of one of our product candidates, the commercial prospects of the product candidate will be harmed, the patent protection period during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize our drugs could be shortened and our or our collaborators’ ability to commence sales and generate revenue from the drug will be delayed. In addition, any delays in completing our clinical trials will increase our costs and slow down our product candidate development and approval process. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects significantly. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of our product candidates.

We have entered into a research collaboration and license agreement (as amended, the “2014 Merck License Agreement”) with Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a wholly owned subsidiary of Merck to develop compounds targeting cognitive dysfunction associated with Alzheimer’s disease and other central nervous system conditions. Under the 2014 Merck License Agreement, Merck is responsible for using commercially reasonable efforts to develop, file for marketing authorization for and, following receipt thereof, to commercialize at least one product thereunder. We are dependent on Merck to provide us with any updates related to clinical trial results, serious adverse events and ongoing communications with the FDA and other regulatory agencies related to these programs, which Merck may provide or withhold in its sole discretion, and as a result we may not be able to provide material updates on a timely basis or at all with respect to these programs. In addition to our existing commercial and academic collaborations, we may also enter into collaboration agreements with other parties in the future relating to our other experimental drug candidates. Ultimately, if such drug candidates are successfully advanced through clinical trials and receive regulatory approval from the FDA, EMA or similar regulatory authorities, such collaboration partners will be responsible for commercialization of these collaboration drugs. The potential for us to obtain future development milestone payments and, ultimately, generate revenue from royalties

26

on sales of such collaboration drugs depends entirely on successful development, regulatory approval, marketing and commercialization by our collaboration partners.

If our collaboration partners do not perform in the manner we expect or fulfil their responsibilities in a timely manner, or at all, if our agreements with them terminate or if the quality or accuracy of the clinical data they obtain is compromised, the clinical development, regulatory approval and commercialization of our collaboration product candidates could be delayed or terminated and it could become necessary, to the extent we have contractual rights to do so, for us to assume the responsibility at our own expense for these activities. In that event, we would likely be required to limit the size and scope of efforts for the development and commercialization of the affected product candidates, to seek additional financing to fund further development, or to identify alternative strategic collaboration partners, and our potential to generate future revenue from royalties and milestone payments from such product candidates would be significantly reduced or delayed and our business would be harmed. Additionally, under our current or future collaborations, our collaboration partners may not be required to disclose information regarding the status of the program, which may limit our ability to provide updates on the status of the program or input on the direction of the program.

Our existing collaborations and any future collaboration arrangements that we may enter into with third parties may not be scientifically, clinically or commercially successful. In addition to the risks inherent in the development of a product candidate, factors that may affect the success of our collaborations include the following:

27

In addition, the 2014 Merck License Agreement (see “Business—Research Collaboration and License Agreement with Merck”) and our other collaboration agreements provide Merck and our collaboration partners with rights to terminate such agreements and licenses under various conditions (including with respect to the 2014 Merck License Agreement, at Merck’s convenience), which if exercised would adversely affect our drug development efforts, make it difficult for us to attract new partners and adversely affect our reputation in the business and financial communities.

The timing and amount of any milestone and royalty payments we may receive under our agreements with our collaboration partners will depend on, among other things, the efforts, allocation of resources, and successful development and commercialization of our product candidates by our collaboration partners. Any payments we may receive in connection with certain milestones or royalties under the 2014 Merck License Agreement may differ materially from those described in this Annual Report, and there can be no assurance that we will receive any such payments at all. We cannot be certain that any of the development and regulatory milestones will be achieved or that we will receive any future milestone payments under these agreements. In addition, in certain circumstances we may believe that we have achieved a particular milestone and the applicable collaboration partner may disagree with our belief. In that case, receipt of that milestone payment may be delayed or may never be received, which may require us to adjust our operating plans.

We may seek to advance the development and commercialization of our unpartnered product candidates through collaboration with third parties, including our early-stage CNS assets and oncology product candidates. If any such collaborations are established in the future, we may have limited control over the amount and timing of resources that our collaborators dedicate to the development of these product candidates. This is also likely to be true in any future collaborations with third parties once any of our product candidates are commercialized. Our ability to generate revenue from these arrangements will depend on our collaborators’ abilities to successfully perform the functions assigned to them in these arrangements.

We face a number of challenges in seeking future collaborations. Collaborations are complex and any potential discussions may not result in a definitive agreement for many reasons. For example, whether we reach a definitive agreement for a collaboration will depend, among other things, upon our assessment of the collaborator’s resources and expertise, the terms and conditions of the proposed collaboration and the proposed collaborator’s evaluation of a number of factors, such as the design or results of our clinical trials, the potential market for our product candidates, the costs and complexities of manufacturing and delivering our product candidates to patients, the potential of competing drugs or product candidates, the existence of uncertainty with respect to ownership or the coverage of our intellectual property and industry and market conditions generally. If we determine that additional collaborations for any product candidate are necessary and are unable to enter into such collaborations on acceptable terms, we might elect to delay or scale back the development or commercialization of our product candidates in order to

28

preserve our financial resources or to allow us adequate time to develop the required resources and systems and expertise ourselves.

Collaboration agreements may not lead to development or commercialization of product candidates in the most efficient manner, or at all. In addition, there have been a significant number of recent business combinations among large biopharmaceutical companies that have resulted in a reduced number of potential future collaborators. If a future collaborator of ours were to be involved in a business combination, the continued pursuit and emphasis on our drug development or commercialization program could be delayed, diminished or terminated.

In the United States, MDMA is listed by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (“DEA”) as a Schedule I substance under the Controlled Substance Act (“CSA”). The DEA regulates chemical compounds as Schedule I, II, III, IV or V substances. Schedule I substances by definition have a high potential for abuse, have no currently accepted medical use in the United States, lack accepted safety for use under medical supervision, and may not be prescribed, marketed or sold in the United States. Pharmaceutical products approved for use in the United States may be listed as Schedule II, III, IV or V, with Schedule II substances considered to present the highest potential for abuse or dependence and Schedule V substances the lowest relative risk of abuse among such substances. Schedule I and II substances are subject to the strictest controls under the CSA, including manufacturing and procurement quotas, security requirements and criteria for importation. In addition, dispensing of Schedule II substances is further restricted. For example, they may not be refilled without a new prescription and may have a black box warning. Most, if not all, state laws in the United States classify MDMA as Schedule I controlled substance. For any product containing MDMA to be available for commercial marketing in the United States, MDMA must be rescheduled, or the product itself must be scheduled, by the DEA to Schedule II, III, IV or V. Commercial marketing in the United States will also require scheduling-related legislative or administrative action, which can further delay the path to market. Any clinical development of EMP-01 or the use of BNC210 in combination with EMP-01 will require FDA approval, and MDMA’s controlled substance status may negatively impact the FDA’s decision regarding whether to approve the clinical development.

Scheduling determinations by the DEA are dependent on FDA approval of a substance or a specific formulation of a substance. Therefore, while MDMA is a Schedule I controlled substance, products approved by the FDA for medical use in the United States that contain MDMA should be placed in Schedules II-V, since approval by the FDA satisfies the “accepted medical use” requirement. If EMP-01 receives FDA approval, we anticipate that the DEA will make a scheduling determination and place it in a schedule other than Schedule I in order for it to be prescribed to patients in the United States. This scheduling determination will be dependent on FDA approval and the FDA’s recommendation as to the appropriate schedule. During the review process, and prior to approval, the FDA may determine that it requires additional data, either from non-clinical or clinical studies, including with respect to whether, or to what extent, the substance has abuse potential. This may delay the approval process and any potential rescheduling process. That delay would be dependent on the quantity of additional data required by the FDA. This scheduling determination will require the DEA to conduct notice and comment rule making including issuing an interim final rule. Such action will be subject to public comment and requests for hearing which could affect the scheduling of these substances. There can be no assurance that the DEA will make a favorable scheduling decision. Even assuming categorization as a Schedule II or lower controlled substance (i.e., Schedule III, IV or V), at the federal level, such substances would also require scheduling determinations under state laws and regulations. Any failure by the DEA to make a favorable scheduling decision with respect to EMP-01 would delay clinical trials and potentially prevent the commercialization of any combination of BNC210 with EMP-01.

Individual U.S. states have also established controlled substance laws and regulations. Though state-controlled substances laws often mirror federal law, because the states are separate jurisdictions, they

29

may separately schedule product candidates. While some states automatically schedule a drug based on federal action, other states schedule drugs through rule making or a legislative action. State scheduling may delay or prevent commercial sale of EMP-01 in certain states even if it obtains federal regulatory approval, which would in turn prevent the commercialization of any combination of BNC210 with EMP-01 in those states.

We are exploring BNC210 in combination with EMP-01, and could potentially explore other combination therapies with future product candidates. We will not be able to market and sell BNC210 or any product candidate we develop in combination with any unapproved therapies that do not ultimately obtain marketing approval. There are risks similar to the ones described for our products currently in development and clinical trials that result from the fact that such therapies are unapproved, such as the potential for serious adverse effects, delay in their clinical trials and lack of FDA approval.

Furthermore, we cannot be certain that we will be able to obtain a steady supply of such therapies for use in developing combinations with our product candidates on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Any failure to obtain such therapies for use in clinical development, and the expense of purchasing therapies in the market, may delay our development timelines, increase our costs and jeopardize our ability to develop our product candidates as commercially viable therapies.

Even if any product candidate we develop were to receive marketing approval or be commercialized for use in combination with other existing therapies, we would continue to be subject to the risk that the FDA or similar regulatory authorities outside of the United States could revoke approval of the therapy used in combination with our product candidate, or that safety, efficacy, manufacturing or supply issues could arise with these existing therapies. Similarly, if the therapies we use in combination with our product candidates are replaced as the standard of care for the indications we choose for any of our product candidates, the FDA or similar regulatory authorities outside of the United States may require us to conduct additional clinical trials. The occurrence of any of these risks could result in our own products, if approved, being removed from the market or being less successful commercially.

If the FDA or similar regulatory authorities outside of the United States do not approve these other drugs or withdraw their approval, or if safety, efficacy, manufacturing, or supply issues arise with the drugs we choose to evaluate in combination with BNC210 or any product candidate we develop, we may be unable to obtain approval of, or market BNC210 or any product candidate we develop.

We utilize and depend upon independent investigators and collaborators, such as medical institutions, CROs, CMOs and strategic partners to help conduct our preclinical studies and clinical trials. We rely extensively, and expect to continue to rely, on medical institutions, clinical investigators, contract laboratories, and other third parties, including collaboration partners, to conduct or otherwise support preclinical studies and clinical trials for our current and future product candidates. We continue to rely heavily on these parties for execution of preclinical studies and clinical trials for our product candidates and control only certain aspects of their activities. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our preclinical studies and clinical trials is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal and regulatory requirements and scientific standards, and our reliance on CROs will not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities.

We and any third parties that we contract with are required to comply with regulations and requirements, including GCP requirements, which are regulations and guidelines enforced by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities for product candidates in clinical development, for conducting, monitoring,

30

recording and reporting the results of clinical trials to ensure that the data and results are scientifically credible and accurate, and that the trial patients are adequately informed of the potential risks of participating in clinical trials and their rights are protected. These regulations are enforced by the FDA, the Competent Authorities of the Member States of the European Economic Area (“EEA”) and comparable foreign regulatory authorities for any drugs in clinical development. Regulatory authorities enforce these GCP requirements through periodic inspections of clinical trial sponsors, principal investigators and trial sites. If we or the third parties we contract with fail to comply with applicable GCP requirements, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. We cannot assure that, upon inspection, the FDA will determine that any of our current or future clinical trials will comply with GCP requirements. In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with current or future product candidates produced under cGMP regulations and will require a large number of study subjects. Our failure or the failure of third parties that we may contract with to comply with these regulations or to recruit a sufficient number of subjects may require us to repeat some aspects of a specific, or an entire, clinical trial, which would delay the marketing approval process and could also subject us to enforcement action. We also are required to register certain ongoing clinical trials and provide certain information, including information relating to the trial’s protocol, on a government-sponsored database, such as ClinicalTrials.gov, within specific timeframes. Failure to do so can result in fines, adverse publicity and civil and criminal sanctions.

Although we have and will continue to design the preclinical studies and clinical trials for our current or future product candidates, or be involved in the design when other parties sponsor the studies or trials, we anticipate that third parties will conduct all of our preclinical studies and clinical trials. As a result, many important aspects of our preclinical and clinical development, including their conduct, timing and response to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, are and will be outside of our direct control. Our reliance on third parties to conduct future clinical trials also results in less direct control over the management of data developed through clinical trials than would be the case if we were relying entirely upon our own staff, and we cannot control whether or not they will devote sufficient time and resources to our product candidates. These third parties may also have relationships with other commercial entities, including our competitors, for whom they may also be conducting clinical trials or other product development activities, which could affect their performance on our behalf. Communicating with outside parties can also be challenging, potentially leading to mistakes as well as difficulties in coordinating activities. Outside parties may:

These factors may materially adversely affect the willingness or ability of third parties to conduct our clinical trials and may subject us to unexpected cost increases that are beyond our control. If our CROs do not perform clinical trials in a satisfactory manner, breach their obligations to us or fail to comply with regulatory requirements, the development, marketing approval and commercialization of our current or future product candidates may be delayed, we may not be able to obtain marketing approval and commercialize our current or future product candidates, or our development programs may be materially and irreversibly harmed. If we are unable to rely on clinical data collected by our CROs, we could be required to repeat, extend the duration of, or increase the size of any clinical trials we conduct and this could significantly delay commercialization and require significantly greater expenditures.

If any of our relationships with these third-party CROs terminate, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with alternative CROs on commercially reasonable terms, or at all. If our CROs do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations or meet expected deadlines, if they need to be replaced or if the quality or accuracy of the clinical data they obtain are compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical protocols, regulatory requirements or for other reasons, any clinical trials such CROs are associated with may be extended, delayed or terminated, and we may not be able to obtain marketing approval for or successfully commercialize our current or future product candidates. As a result, we believe that our financial results and the commercial prospects for our current or future product

31

candidates in the subject indication would be harmed, our costs could increase and our ability to generate revenue could be delayed.

The drug substance and drug product in our product candidates are supplied to us from a small number of suppliers, and in some cases sole source suppliers. Our ability to successfully develop our current or future product candidates, and to ultimately supply our commercial drugs in quantities sufficient to meet the market demand, depends in part on our ability to obtain the drug product and drug substance for these drugs in accordance with regulatory requirements and in sufficient quantities for commercialization and clinical testing.

The facilities used by our contract manufacturers to manufacture our product candidates will be subject to inspections that will be conducted after we submit any marketing application to the FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities. We may not control the manufacturing process of, and may be completely dependent on, our contract manufacturing partners for compliance with cGMP requirements and any other regulatory requirements of the FDA or other regulatory authorities for the manufacture of our product candidates. Beyond periodic audits, we have no control over the ability of our contract manufacturers to maintain adequate quality control, quality assurance and qualified personnel. If the FDA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority does not approve our marketing applications identifying these facilities for the manufacture of our product candidates or if it withdraws any approval in the future, we may need to find alternative manufacturing facilities, which would require that we incur significant additional costs and materially adversely affect our ability to develop, obtain regulatory approval for or market our product candidates, if approved. Similarly, if any third-party manufacturers on which we will rely fail to manufacture quantities of our product candidates at quality levels necessary to meet regulatory requirements and at a scale sufficient to meet anticipated demand at a cost that allows us to achieve profitability, our business, financial condition and prospects could be materially and adversely affected.

Further, we do not currently have arrangements in place for a redundant or second-source supply of all drug product or drug substance in the event any of our current suppliers of such drug product and drug substance cease their operations for any reason. Any delays in the delivery of our drug substance, drug product or starting materials could have an adverse effect and potentially harm our business.

For all of our current or future product candidates, we intend to identify and qualify additional manufacturers to provide drug product and drug substance prior to submission of an NDA to the FDA and/or an MAA to the EMA. We are not certain, however, that our single-source and dual source suppliers will be able to meet our demand for their products, either because of the nature of our agreements with those suppliers, our limited experience with those suppliers or our relative importance as a customer to those suppliers. It may be difficult for us to assess their ability to timely meet our demand in the future based on past performance. While our suppliers have generally met our demand for their products on a timely basis in the past, they may subordinate our needs in the future to their other customers.

Establishing additional or replacement suppliers for the drug product and drug substance used in our current or future product candidates, if required, may not be accomplished quickly. In some cases, the technical skills required to manufacture our products or product candidates may be unique or proprietary to the original supplier and we may have difficulty, or there may be contractual restrictions prohibiting us from, transferring such skills to a back-up or alternate supplier, or we may be unable to transfer such skills at all. If we are able to find a replacement supplier, such replacement supplier would need to be qualified and may require additional regulatory approval, which could result in further delay. In addition, changes in manufacturers often involve changes in manufacturing procedures and processes, which could require that we conduct bridging studies between our prior clinical supply used in our clinical trials and that of any new manufacturer. We may be unsuccessful in demonstrating the comparability of clinical supplies which could require the conduct of additional clinical trials.

32

While we seek to maintain adequate inventory of the drug product and drug substance used in our current or future product candidates, any interruption or delay in the supply of components or materials, or our inability to obtain drug product and drug substance from alternate sources at acceptable prices in a timely manner, could impede, delay, limit or prevent our development efforts, which could harm our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

We have only six full-time employees, one part-time employee, two full-time consultants and three part-time consultants and, as a result, we rely on outsourcing arrangements for a significant portion of our activities, including clinical research, data collection and analysis and manufacturing. We may have limited control over these third parties and we cannot guarantee that they will perform their obligations in an effective and timely manner.

The manufacture of pharmaceutical products requires significant expertise and capital investment, including the development of advanced manufacturing techniques and process controls. We do not own or operate manufacturing facilities for the production of any component of BNC210, nor do we have plans to develop our own manufacturing operations in the foreseeable future. We currently depend on third-party contract manufacturers for all of our required raw materials, drug substance and drug product for our clinical trials and to fill, label, package, store and distribute our investigational drug product. Although potential alternative suppliers and manufacturers for some components have been identified, we have not qualified these vendors to date. If we were required to change vendors, it could result in a failure to meet regulatory requirements or projected timelines and necessary quality standards for successful manufacturing of the various required lots of material for our development and commercialization efforts.

We do not have any current contractual relationships for the manufacture of commercial supplies of BNC210. If BNC210 is approved for sale by any regulatory agency, we intend to enter into agreements with third-party contract manufacturers for commercial production. The number of third-party manufacturers with the expertise, required regulatory approvals and facilities to manufacture bulk drug substance on a commercial scale is limited.

In addition, our reliance on third party CROs and CMOs entails further risks, including:

We may in the future form or seek strategic alliances or acquisitions, create joint ventures, or enter into additional collaboration and licensing arrangements with third parties that we believe will complement or augment our development and commercialization efforts with respect to our current product candidates and any future product candidates that we may develop. Any of these relationships may require us to incur non-recurring and other charges, increase our near and long-term expenditures, issue securities that dilute our existing shareholders or disrupt our management and business.

In addition, we face significant competition in seeking appropriate strategic partners and the negotiation process is time-consuming and complex. Moreover, we may not be successful in our efforts to establish a strategic partnership or acquisition or other alternative arrangements for our current or future product candidates because they may be deemed to be at too early of a stage of development for collaborative effort and third parties may not view our current or future product candidates as having the requisite potential to demonstrate safety, potency, purity and efficacy and obtain marketing approval.

33

Further, collaborations involving our technologies or current or future product candidates are subject to numerous risks, which may include the following:

As a result, we may not be able to realize the benefit of our existing collaboration and licensing arrangements or any future strategic partnerships or acquisitions, collaborations or license arrangements we may enter into if we are unable to successfully integrate them with our existing operations and company culture, which could delay our timelines or otherwise adversely affect our business. We also cannot be certain that, following a strategic transaction, license, collaboration or other business development partnership, we will achieve the revenue or specific net income that justifies such transaction. Any delays in entering into new collaborations or strategic partnership agreements related to our current or future product candidates could delay the development and commercialization of our current or future product candidates in certain geographies or for certain indications, which would harm our business prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

We do not have our own manufacturing facilities or personnel and currently rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties for the manufacture of our current or future product candidates. These third-party manufacturing providers may not be able to provide adequate resources or capacity to meet our needs and may incorporate their own proprietary processes into our product candidate manufacturing processes. We have limited control and oversight of a third party’s proprietary process, and a third party may elect to modify its process without our consent or knowledge. These modifications could negatively impact our manufacturing, including product loss or failure that requires additional manufacturing runs or a change in manufacturer, either of which could significantly increase the cost of and significantly delay the manufacture of our current or future product candidates.

34

Manufacturing of drug products is complex and requires significant expertise and capital investment, including the development of advanced manufacturing techniques and process controls. Manufacturers of drug products often encounter difficulties in production, particularly in scaling up, validating the production process and assuring high reliability of the manufacturing process, including the absence of contamination. These problems include logistics and shipping, difficulties with production costs and yields, quality control, including lot consistency, stability of the product, product testing, operator error and availability of qualified personnel, as well as compliance with strictly enforced federal, state and foreign regulations. Furthermore, if contaminants are discovered in our supply of our product candidates or in the manufacturing facilities, such manufacturing facilities may need to be closed for an extended period of time to investigate and remedy the contamination. We cannot assure that any stability failures or other issues relating to the manufacture of our product candidates will not occur in the future.

As our current or future product candidates progress through preclinical studies and clinical trials towards potential approval and commercialization, it is expected that various aspects of the manufacturing process will be altered in an effort to optimize processes and results. Such changes may require amendments to be made to regulatory applications which may further delay the timeframes under which modified manufacturing processes can be used for any of our current or future product candidates and additional bridging studies or trials may be required and may not be successful. We may be unsuccessful in demonstrating the comparability of clinical supplies which could require the conduct of additional clinical trials. Any such delay could have a material adverse impact on our business, results of operations and prospects.

In December 2019, a novel strain of coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2 which causes the disease COVID-19, was first reported in Wuhan, China and has since become a global pandemic. In an effort to contain the spread of COVID-19, many countries, including China, the United States and most other jurisdictions around the world, have imposed unprecedented restrictions on travel, business closures, quarantines and lock-downs, resulting in a substantial reduction in economic activity. On January 30, 2020, the World Health Organization (“WHO”), declared this COVID-19 outbreak a Public Health Emergency of International Concern. On February 28, 2020, the WHO increased the assessment of the risk of spread and the risk of impact of COVID-19 to “very high” at a global level. On March 11, 2020, the WHO declared the COVID-19 outbreak a pandemic.

As COVID-19 has evolved into a worldwide pandemic, it has resulted in adverse effects in the global economy and financial markets, such as significant declines in the global stock markets. We may experience limitations on employee resources in the future, including because of sickness of employees or their families. The effects of government actions and our own policies and those of third parties to reduce the spread of COVID-19 have and may continue to negatively impact productivity and slow down or delay our ongoing and future clinical trials, preclinical studies and research and development activities, and have caused, and may further cause, disruptions to our supply chain and may impair our ability to execute our business development strategy. For example, we may in the future experience enrollment delays and patient retention issues in our clinical trials as a result of the impact of COVID-19. In the event that government authorities were to enhance current restrictions, our employees and those of our third party contractors who currently are not telecommuting may no longer be able to access our or their facilities, as applicable, and our operations may be limited or curtailed.

The COVID-19 pandemic is ongoing, in large part due to the prevalence of new variants of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, and, accordingly, we may continue to experience ongoing disruptions that could severely impact our business, preclinical studies and clinical trials, including:

35

These and other disruptions in our operations and the global economy could negatively impact our business, operating results and financial condition.

Our clinical trials have been, and may in the future be, affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. We may experience enrollment delays and patient retention issues in our clinical trials as a result of the impact of COVID-19. Similarly, our ability to recruit and retain principal investigators and site staff who, as healthcare providers, may have heightened exposure to COVID-19, may be adversely impacted. We and our CROs have also made certain adjustments to the operation of our trials in an effort to ensure the monitoring and safety of patients and minimize risks to trial integrity during the pandemic in accordance with the guidance issued by the FDA on March 18, 2020 and most recently updated on January 27, 2021, and may need to make further adjustments in the future. Many of these adjustments are new and untested, may not be effective in mitigating risks, and may have unforeseen effects on the enrollment, progress and completion of these trials and the findings from these trials. These events could delay our clinical trials, increase the cost of completing our clinical trials and negatively impact the integrity, reliability or robustness of the data from our clinical trials.

In addition, quarantines, shelter-in-place and similar government orders related to COVID-19 or other infectious diseases, or the perception that such orders, shutdowns or other restrictions on the conduct of business operations could occur, could adversely affect personnel at third-party manufacturing facilities upon which we rely, or the availability or cost of materials, which could disrupt the supply chain for our product candidates. To the extent our suppliers and service providers are unable to comply with their obligations under our agreements with them or they are otherwise unable to deliver or are delayed in delivering goods and services to us due to the COVID-19 pandemic, our ability to continue meeting clinical supply demand for our product candidates or otherwise advancing development of our product candidates may become impaired.

The spread of COVID-19 and actions taken to reduce its spread may also materially affect us economically. While the potential economic impact brought by, and the duration of, the COVID-19 pandemic may be difficult to assess or predict, it has already caused, and could result in further, significant disruption of global financial markets, reducing our ability to access capital, which could in the future negatively affect our liquidity and financial position. In addition, the trading prices for other

36

biopharmaceutical companies have been highly volatile as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. As a result, we may face difficulties raising capital through sales of our ADSs or other securities and such sales may be on unfavorable terms.

COVID-19 and actions taken to reduce its spread continue to rapidly evolve. For example, one vaccine for COVID-19 was granted Emergency Use Authorization by the FDA in late 2020 and subsequently granted approval by the FDA and two others were granted Emergency Use Authorization by the FDA in late 2020 and early 2021, and more may be approved or authorized in the future. The resultant demand for vaccines and potential for manufacturing facilities and materials to be commandeered under the Defense Production Act of 1950, or equivalent foreign legislation, may make it more difficult to obtain materials or manufacturing slots for the products needed for our clinical trials, which could lead to delays in these trials. The extent to which COVID-19 may further impede the development of our product candidates, reduce the productivity of our employees, disrupt our supply chains, delay our clinical trials, reduce our access to capital or limit our business development activities, will depend on future developments, which are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted with confidence, such as the ultimate geographic spread of the disease, the duration of the outbreak, travel restrictions and social distancing in China, Australia, the United States and other countries, business closures or business disruptions and the effectiveness of actions taken in the United States and other countries to contain and treat the disease. To the extent the COVID-19 pandemic adversely affects our business and financial results, it may also have the effect of heightening many of the other risks described in this “Risk Factors” section, such as those relating to the timing and results of our clinical trials and our financing needs.

Our operations could be subject to earthquakes, power shortages, telecommunications failures, water shortages, floods, hurricanes, typhoons, fires, extreme weather conditions, medical epidemics and other natural or manmade disasters or business interruptions, for which we are predominantly self-insured. The occurrence of any of these business disruptions could seriously harm our operations and financial condition and increase our costs and expenses.

The commercial success of our current or future product candidates, if approved by the FDA or other applicable regulatory authorities, will depend upon the awareness and acceptance of our current or future product candidates among the medical community, including physicians, patients and healthcare payors. If our product candidates do not achieve an adequate level of acceptance, we may not generate significant revenue and we may not become profitable. Market acceptance of our current or future product candidates, if approved, will depend on a number of factors, including, among others:

37

If our current or future product candidates are approved but do not achieve an adequate level of acceptance by patients, physicians and payors, we may not generate sufficient revenue from our current or future product candidates to become or remain profitable. Before granting reimbursement approval, healthcare payors may require us to demonstrate that our current or future product candidates, in addition to treating these target indications, also provide incremental health benefits to patients. Our efforts to educate the medical community, patient organizations and third-party payors about the benefits of our current or future product candidates may require significant resources and may never be successful.

We do not have sales, marketing or distribution infrastructure. To achieve commercial success for any product candidate for which we may obtain marketing approval, we will need to establish a sales, marketing and distribution organization. In the future, we expect to build a focused sales and marketing infrastructure to market some of our product candidates in the United States, if and when they are approved. There are risks involved with establishing our own sales, marketing and distribution capabilities. For example, recruiting and training a sales force is expensive and time consuming and could delay any product launch. If the commercial launch of a product candidate for which we recruit a sales force and establish marketing capabilities is delayed or does not occur for any reason, we would have prematurely or unnecessarily incurred these commercialization expenses. This may be costly, and our investment would be lost if we cannot retain or reposition our sales and marketing personnel.

Factors that may inhibit our efforts to market our products on our own include:

If we are unable to establish our own sales, marketing and distribution capabilities and are forced to enter into arrangements with, and rely on, third parties to perform these services, our revenue and our profitability, if any, are likely to be lower than if we had developed such capabilities ourselves. In addition, we may not be successful in entering into arrangements with third parties to sell, market and distribute our product candidates or may be unable to do so on terms that are favorable to us. We likely will have little control over such third parties, and any of them may fail to devote the necessary resources and attention to sell and market our products effectively.

There can be no assurance that we will be able to develop in-house sales, marketing and distribution capabilities or establish or maintain relationships with third parties to commercialize any product in the United States or overseas. If we do not establish sales, marketing and distribution capabilities

38

successfully, either on our own or in collaboration with third parties, we will not be successful in commercializing our product candidates.

The development and commercialization of new drugs is highly competitive. We face and will continue to face competition from third parties that use drug technologies similar to ours and from companies focused on more traditional therapeutic modalities. Potential competitors also include academic institutions, government agencies and other public and private research organizations that conduct research, seek patent protection and establish collaborative arrangements for research, development, manufacturing and commercialization of new drugs.

There are currently no FDA-approved drugs for the acute treatment of SAD. There are four FDA-approved generic antidepressants for treatment of SAD that include paroxetine (Paxil), previously marketed by GlaxoSmithKline, sertraline (Zoloft) and venlafaxine (Effexor), both previously marketed by Pfizer, and fluvoxamine (Luvox), marketed by Jazz Pharmaceuticals. Although not FDA-approved for the acute treatment of SAD, generic benzodiazepines and beta blockers are used off-label as well. Additionally, we are aware of several product candidates in clinical development that are being developed for the acute treatment of SAD, by VistaGen Therapeutics and Vanda Pharmaceuticals, among others.

There are two FDA-approved generic antidepressants indicated to treat PTSD, sertraline (Zoloft) and paroxetine (Paxil). In addition, the most recent and relevant PTSD treatment guidelines from the American Psychological Association and the U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs and Department of Defense published in 2017 also recommend fluoxetine (Prozac) or venlafaxine (Effexor). We are aware of several other companies seeking to find improved therapeutics for PTSD by exploring mechanisms of action different from the approved SSRIs, including Otsuka, Lundbeck, Aptinyx, Acadia, BioXcel, Praxis, MAPS, Bionorica, Jazz Pharmaceuticals and Nobilis, among others.

Many of our current or future competitors have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals and reimbursement and marketing approved drugs than we do. Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical, biotechnology and diagnostic industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. These competitors also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific, sales, marketing and management personnel and establishing clinical trial sites and patient registration for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs.

Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize drugs that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient or are less expensive than any drugs that we or our collaborators may develop. Our competitors also may obtain FDA or other regulatory approval for their drugs more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we or our collaborators are able to enter the market. The key competitive factors affecting the success of all of our current or future product candidates, if approved, are likely to be their efficacy, safety, convenience, price, the level of generic competition and the availability of reimbursement from government and other third-party payors.

In the United States and markets in other countries, patients generally rely on third-party payors to reimburse all, or part of the costs associated with their treatment. Adequate coverage and reimbursement from governmental healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, and commercial payors is critical to new product acceptance. The availability and adequacy of coverage and reimbursement by governmental healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, private health insurers and other

39

third-party payors are essential for most patients to be able to afford drugs such as our product candidates, assuming approval. Our ability to achieve acceptable levels of coverage and reimbursement for drugs by governmental authorities, private health insurers and other organizations will have an effect on our ability to successfully commercialize, and attract additional collaboration partners to invest in the development of our product candidates. We cannot provide any assurance that coverage and reimbursement in the United States, the European Union or elsewhere will be available for any drug that we may develop, and any reimbursement that may become available may be decreased or eliminated in the future. Third-party payors increasingly are challenging prices charged for pharmaceutical products and services. If reimbursement is not available or is available only at limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize our product candidates, and may not be able to obtain a satisfactory financial return on drugs that we may develop.

There is significant uncertainty related to the insurance coverage and reimbursement of newly approved drugs. In the United States, third-party payors, including private and governmental payors, such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs, play an important role in determining the extent to which new drugs and biologics will be covered. The Medicare and Medicaid programs increasingly are used as models for how private payors and other governmental payors develop their coverage and reimbursement policies for drugs and biologics. It is difficult to predict at this time what third-party payors will decide with respect to the coverage and reimbursement for our product candidates.

Factors payors consider in determining reimbursement are based on whether the product is:

Net prices for drugs may be reduced by mandatory discounts or rebates required by government healthcare programs or private payors and by any future relaxation of laws that presently restrict imports of drugs from countries where they may be sold at lower prices than in the United States.

Increasingly, third-party payors are requiring that drug companies provide them with predetermined discounts from list prices and are challenging the prices charged for medical products. We cannot be sure that reimbursement will be available for any product candidate that we commercialize and, if reimbursement is available, the level of reimbursement. In addition, many pharmaceutical manufacturers must calculate and report certain price reporting metrics to the government, such as average sales price (“ASP”) and best price. Penalties may apply in some cases when such metrics are not submitted accurately and timely. Further, these prices for drugs may be reduced by mandatory discounts or rebates required by government healthcare programs.

Outside the United States, international operations are generally subject to extensive governmental price controls and other market regulations, and we believe the increasing emphasis on cost-containment initiatives in Europe, Canada, and other countries has and will continue to put pressure on the pricing and usage of our product candidates. In many countries, the prices of medical drugs are subject to varying price control mechanisms as part of national health systems. Other countries allow companies to fix their own prices for medical drugs, but monitor and control company profits. Additional foreign price controls or other changes in pricing regulation could restrict the amount that we are able to charge for our product candidates. Accordingly, in markets outside the United States, the reimbursement for our drugs may be reduced compared with the United States and may be insufficient to generate commercially reasonable revenue and profits.

Moreover, increasing efforts by governmental and third-party payors in the United States and abroad to cap or reduce healthcare costs may cause such organizations to limit both coverage and the level of reimbursement for newly approved drugs and, as a result, they may not cover or provide adequate payment for our product candidates. We expect to experience pricing pressures in connection with the sale of any of our product candidates due to the trend toward managed healthcare, the increasing

40

influence of health maintenance organizations, and additional legislative changes. The downward pressure on healthcare costs in general, particularly prescription drugs and surgical procedures and other treatments, has become very intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new drugs.

Our business exposes us to potential liability risks that are inherent in the testing, manufacturing and marketing of human therapeutic drugs. Clinical trials involve the testing of product candidates on human subjects or volunteers under a research plan, and carry a risk of liability for personal injury or death to patients due to unforeseen adverse side effects, improper administration of the product candidate or other factors. Many of these patients are already seriously ill and are therefore particularly vulnerable to further illness or death.

We currently carry clinical trial liability insurance in the amount of A$20.0 million in the aggregate, but there can be no assurance that we will be able to maintain such insurance or that the amount of such insurance will be adequate to cover claims. We could be materially and adversely affected if we were required to pay damages or incur defense costs in connection with a claim outside the scope of indemnity or insurance coverage, if the indemnity is not performed or enforced in accordance with its terms or if our liability exceeds the amount of applicable insurance. In addition, there can be no assurance that insurance will continue to be available on terms acceptable to us, if at all, or that if obtained, the insurance coverage will be sufficient to cover any potential claims or liabilities. Similar risks would exist upon the commercialization or marketing of any drugs by us or our collaborators.

Regardless of their merit or eventual outcome, product liability claims may result in:

Should any of these events occur, they could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition that could adversely affect the trading price of our ADSs.

The research, testing, manufacturing, labeling, approval, selling, import, export, marketing and distribution of drug and biologic products are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA, EMA and comparable regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions, which regulations differ from country to country. Neither we nor any of our collaboration partners is permitted to market any drug or biologic products in the United States until we receive regulatory approval from the FDA. Equally, neither we nor any of our collaboration partners is permitted to market any drug or biologic in the EEA, until we receive a marketing authorization from the EMA or EEA Member State Competent Authorities. We have not submitted an application or obtained regulatory approval for any of our product candidates anywhere in the world. Obtaining regulatory approval of an NDA, BLA or marketing authorization, can be a lengthy, expensive and uncertain process. In addition, failure to comply with FDA and other applicable U.S., EEA and other comparable regulatory requirements may subject us to administrative or judicially imposed sanctions or other actions, including:

41

Prior to obtaining approval to commercialize a product candidate in the United States, the EEA, or elsewhere, we or our collaboration partners must demonstrate with substantial evidence from well-controlled clinical trials, and to the satisfaction of the FDA, EMA or other similar regulatory authorities, that such product candidates are safe and effective for their intended uses. The number of preclinical studies and clinical trials that will be required for approval by the FDA, EMA or other regulatory authorities varies depending on the product candidate, the disease or condition that the product candidate is designed to address, and the regulations applicable to any particular product candidate. Results from preclinical studies and clinical trials can be interpreted in different ways. Even if we believe the preclinical or clinical data for our product candidates are promising, such data may not be sufficient to support approval by the FDA, EMA and other regulatory authorities. Administering product candidates to humans may produce undesirable side effects, which could interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials and result in the FDA, EMA or other regulatory authorities denying approval of a product candidate for any or all targeted indications.

The time required to obtain approval by the FDA, EMA and comparable authorities is unpredictable, typically takes many years following the commencement of clinical trials, and depends upon numerous factors. The FDA, EMA and comparable authorities have substantial discretion in the approval process and we may encounter matters with the FDA, EMA or such comparable authorities that requires us to expend additional time and resources and delay or prevent the approval of our product candidates. For example, the FDA or EMA may require us to conduct additional studies or trials for product candidates either prior to or post-approval, such as additional drug-drug interaction studies or safety or efficacy studies or trials, or it may object to elements of our clinical development program such as the number of subjects in our current clinical trials from the United States. In addition, approval policies, regulations or the type and amount of clinical data necessary to gain approval may change during the course of a product candidate’s clinical development and may vary among jurisdictions, which may cause delays in the approval or result in a decision not to approve an application for regulatory approval. Despite the time and expense exerted, failure can occur at any stage. Applications for our product candidates could fail to receive regulatory approval for many reasons, including but not limited to the following:

This lengthy approval process, as well as the unpredictability of the results of clinical trials, may result in our failure to obtain regulatory approval to market any of our product candidates, which would significantly harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Additionally, if the FDA, EMA or other regulatory authority requires that we conduct additional clinical trials, places limitations on our label, delays approval to market our product candidates or limits the use of our drugs, our business and results of operations may be harmed.

42

In addition, even if we were to obtain approval, regulatory authorities may approve any of our product candidates for fewer or more limited indications than we request, may not approve the price we intend to charge for our drugs, may grant approval contingent on the performance of costly post-marketing clinical trials, or may approve a product candidate with a label that does not include the labeling claims necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of any future drug. Any of the foregoing scenarios could harm the commercial prospects for our drugs.

We have not completed all the clinical trials necessary to support an application with the FDA, EMA or other regulatory authority for approval to market any of our product candidates. Before obtaining regulatory approvals for the commercial sale of our drugs, we must demonstrate through lengthy, complex and expensive preclinical studies and clinical trials that the product candidate is both safe and effective for use in each target indication. Clinical trials often fail to demonstrate safety and efficacy of the product candidate studied for the target indication. Most product candidates that commence clinical trials are never approved as drugs. If our product candidates are not shown to be both safe and effective in clinical trials, we will not be able to obtain regulatory approval or commercialize these product candidates. In such case, we would need to develop other compounds and conducting associated preclinical studies and clinical trials, as well as the potential need for additional financing, would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

The results of any Phase 3 or other pivotal clinical trial may not be adequate to support marketing approval. These clinical trials are lengthy and, with respect to non-orphan indications, usually involve many hundreds to thousands of patients. In addition, if the FDA, EMA or another applicable regulator disagrees with our or our collaborator’s choice of the key testing criteria or primary endpoint, or the results for the primary endpoint are not robust or significant relative to the control group of patients not receiving the experimental therapy, such regulator may refuse to approve our product candidate in the region in which it has jurisdiction. The FDA, EMA or other applicable regulators also may require additional clinical trials as a condition for approving any of these product candidates.

As product candidates are developed through preclinical to late stage clinical trials towards approval and commercialization, it is common that various aspects of the development program, such as manufacturing methods and formulation, are altered along the way in an effort to optimize processes and results. Such changes carry the risk that they will not achieve these intended objectives. Any of these changes could cause our product candidates to perform differently and affect the results of planned clinical trials or other future clinical trials conducted with the altered materials. This could delay completion of clinical trials, require the conduct of bridging clinical trials or the repetition of one or more clinical trials, increase clinical trial costs, delay approval of our product candidates or jeopardize our or our collaborators’ ability to commence drug sales and generate revenue. For example, following our Phase 2 RESTORE clinical trial in patients diagnosed with PTSD, which did not meet its primary endpoint, we reformulated BNC210 to be in tablet form to address limitations of the liquid suspension formulation used in the RESTORE trial, including overcoming the food effect (i.e. the requirement to be given with food), improving patient compliance and providing rapid absorption, dose linear pharmacokinetics and ability to reach blood exposure predicted from the pharmacometric analysis as necessary to give us a higher probability of success in a subsequent PTSD trial. This has resulted in additional costs and delays in our clinical program such as the need to conduct trials to demonstrate the clinical safety, pharmacokinetic activity and stability of the tablet formulation. There can be no assurance we will not have to alter manufacturing methods or formulations in the future which may result in additional costs or delays and materially adverse our business.

43

Sales of our approved drugs will be subject to U.S. and non-U.S. regulatory requirements governing clinical trials and regulatory approval, and we plan to seek regulatory approval to commercialize our product candidates in the United States, the EEA, and other countries. Clinical trials conducted in one country may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other countries and regulatory approval in one country does not ensure approval in any other country, while a failure or delay in obtaining regulatory approval in one country may have a negative effect on the regulatory approval process in others. For example, approval in the United States by the FDA does not ensure approval by the regulatory authorities in other countries or jurisdictions, and similarly approval by a non-U.S. regulatory authority, such as the EMA, does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities in other countries, including by the FDA. However, the failure to obtain approval in one jurisdiction may have a negative impact on our ability to obtain approval elsewhere. Approval processes and regulatory requirements vary among countries and can involve additional drug testing and validation and additional administrative review periods. Even if a drug is approved, the FDA or EMA, as the case may be, may limit the indications for which the drug may be marketed, require extensive warnings on the drug labeling or require expensive and time-consuming clinical trials or reporting as conditions of approval. In many countries outside the United States, a product candidate must be approved for reimbursement before it can be approved for sale in that country. In some cases, the price that we intend to charge for a drug is also subject to approval. Regulatory authorities in other countries also have their own requirements for approval of product candidates with which we must comply prior to marketing in those countries. Obtaining non-U.S. regulatory approvals and compliance with such non-U.S. regulatory requirements could result in significant delays, difficulties and costs for us and could delay or prevent the introduction of our current and any future drugs, in certain countries. If we fail to comply with regulatory requirements in international markets or to obtain and maintain required approvals, or if regulatory approvals in international markets are delayed, our target market will be reduced and our ability to realize the full market potential of our product candidates will be unrealized.

Our business operations and current and future arrangements with investigators, healthcare professionals, consultants, third-party payors, patient organizations and customers, may expose us to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations. These laws may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we conduct our operations, including how we research, market, sell and distribute our product candidates, if approved. Such laws include:

44

We are also subject to state and foreign equivalents of each of the healthcare laws and regulations described above, among others, some of which may be broader in scope and may apply regardless of the payor. Many U.S. states have adopted laws similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute and False Claims Act, and may apply to our business practices, including, but not limited to, research, distribution, sales or marketing arrangements and claims involving healthcare items or services reimbursed by non-governmental payors, including private insurers. In addition, some states have passed laws that require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the April 2003 OIG Compliance Program Guidance for Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and/or the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America’s Code on Interactions with Healthcare Professionals. Several states also impose other marketing restrictions or require pharmaceutical companies to make marketing or price disclosures to the state and require the registration of pharmaceutical sales representatives. There are ambiguities as to what is required to comply with these state requirements and if we fail to comply with an applicable state law requirement we could be subject to penalties.

The scope and enforcement of these laws is uncertain and subject to rapid change in the current environment of healthcare reform, especially in light of the lack of applicable precedent and regulations.

Ensuring that our future business arrangements with third parties comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations could involve substantial costs. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices do not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the laws described above or any other governmental laws and regulations that may apply to us, we may be subject to significant penalties, including civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, the exclusion from participation in federal and state government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, reputational harm, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations. It may also subject us to additional reporting obligations and oversight, if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement, deferred prosecution agreement, or other agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws. If any of the physicians or other providers or entities with whom we expect to do business is found to be not in compliance with applicable laws, they may be subject to similar criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from

45

government funded healthcare programs and imprisonment. If any of the above occur, it could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations.

We are exposed to the risk that our employees, independent contractors, principal investigators, CROs, consultants, vendors and collaboration partners may engage in fraudulent conduct or other illegal activities. Misconduct by these parties could include intentional, reckless and/or negligent conduct or unauthorized activities that violate: (i) the regulations of the FDA, EMA and other regulatory authorities, including those laws that require the reporting of true, complete and accurate information to such authorities; (ii) manufacturing standards; (iii) federal and state data privacy, security, fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations in the United States and abroad; or (iv) laws that require the reporting of true, complete and accurate financial information and data. In particular, sales, marketing and business arrangements in the healthcare industry are subject to extensive laws and regulations intended to prevent fraud, misconduct, kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive practices. These laws and regulations may restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, sales commission, customer incentive programs and other business arrangements.

Activities subject to these laws could also involve the improper use of information obtained in the course of clinical trials or creating fraudulent data in our preclinical studies or clinical trials, which could result in regulatory sanctions and cause serious harm to our reputation. It is not always possible to identify and deter misconduct by employees and other third parties, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent misconduct may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to comply with such laws or regulations.

Additionally, we are subject to the risk that a person could allege such fraud or other misconduct, even if none occurred. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a significant impact on our business and results of operations, including the imposition of significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, monetary fines, possible exclusion from participation in Medicare, Medicaid and other U.S. federal healthcare programs, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, and curtailment of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations.

In the United States and some foreign jurisdictions, there have been a number of legislative and regulatory changes to the healthcare system that could affect our future results of operations. In particular, there have been and continue to be a number of federal and state initiatives in the United States that seek to reduce healthcare costs. For example, in 2010, the Affordable Care Act (“ACA”) was enacted, which substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers. Among the provisions of the ACA, those of greatest importance to the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are the following:

46

Since its enactment, there have been judicial, Congressional and executive challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. On June 17, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed the most recent judicial challenge to the ACA brought by several states without specifically ruling on the constitutionality of the ACA. Prior to the Supreme Court’s decision, President Biden issued an executive order to initiate a special enrollment period from February 15, 2021 through August 15, 2021 for purposes of obtaining health insurance coverage through the ACA marketplace. The executive order also instructed certain governmental agencies to review and reconsider their existing policies and rules that limit access to healthcare, including among others, reexamining Medicaid demonstration projects and waiver programs that include work requirements, and policies that create unnecessary barriers to obtaining access to health insurance coverage through Medicaid or the ACA. It is unclear how other healthcare reform measures, if any, will impact our business.

In addition, other legislative and regulatory changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the ACA was enacted.

47

Additionally, there has been increasing legislative and enforcement interest in the United States with respect to drug pricing practices. Specifically, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny over the manner in which manufacturers set prices for their marketed products, which has already resulted in several U.S. Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, reduce the cost of prescription drugs under Medicare, and review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs.

We expect that additional U.S. federal healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that the U.S. Federal Government will pay for healthcare drugs and services, which could result in reduced demand for our product candidates or additional pricing pressures.

Individual states in the United States have also become increasingly active in passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain drug access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. Legally mandated price controls on payment amounts by third-party payors or other restrictions could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. In addition, regional healthcare authorities and individual hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine what pharmaceutical products and which suppliers will be included in their prescription drug and other healthcare programs. This could reduce the ultimate demand for our drugs or put pressure on our drug pricing, which could negatively affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

In the EEA, similar political, economic and regulatory developments may affect our ability to profitably commercialize our current or any future drugs. In addition to continuing pressure on prices and cost containment measures, legislative developments at the EEA or member state level may result in significant additional requirements or obstacles that may increase our operating costs. In international markets, reimbursement and healthcare payment systems vary significantly by country, and many countries have instituted price ceilings on specific drugs and therapies.

We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. If we or our collaborators are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we or our collaborators are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, our product candidates may lose any regulatory approval that may have been obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability, which would adversely affect our business.

The global data protection landscape is rapidly evolving, and we are or may become subject to numerous state, federal and foreign laws, requirements and regulations governing the collection, use, disclosure, retention, and security of personal data, such as information that we may collect in connection with clinical trials in the United States and abroad. Implementation standards and enforcement practices are likely to remain uncertain for the foreseeable future, and we cannot yet determine the impact future laws, regulations, standards, or perception of their requirements may have on our business. This evolution may create uncertainty in our business, affect our ability to operate in certain jurisdictions or to collect, store, transfer use and share personal information, necessitate the acceptance of more onerous obligations in our contracts, result in liability or impose additional costs on us. The cost of compliance with these laws, regulations and standards is high and is likely to increase in the future. Any failure or perceived failure by us to comply with federal, state or foreign laws or regulation, our internal policies and procedures or our contracts governing our processing of personal information could result in negative publicity, government

48

investigations and enforcement actions, claims by third parties and damage to our reputation, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our operations, financial performance and business.

As our operations and business grow, we may become subject to or affected by new or additional data protection laws and regulations and face increased scrutiny or attention from regulatory authorities. In Australia, Australia’s Privacy Act 1988 (Cth), as amended, imposes mandatory data breach notification requirements providing that where personal information is lost or is subject to unauthorized access or disclosure, and that would be likely to lead to serious harm, then affected individuals and the Information Commissioner must be notified within 30 days. A failure to notify can result in penalties of up to A$2.2 million. Further, the sending of commercial electronic messages without prior consent is prohibited under Australia’s Spam Act 2003. Violations of this legislation are subject to penalties of up to A$2.1 million for repeat offenders, and the regulator, the Australian Communications and Media Authority, is active in monitoring market behavior and prosecuting infringements. Obligations and restrictions imposed by current and future applicable laws, regulations, contracts, and industry standards may affect our ability to provide all the current features of our products and subscriptions and our customers’ ability to use our products and subscriptions, and could require us to modify the features and functionality of our products and subscriptions.

In the United States, HIPAA imposes, among other things, certain standards relating to the privacy, security, transmission and breach reporting of individually identifiable health information. Certain states have also adopted comparable privacy and security laws and regulations, some of which may be more stringent than HIPAA. Such laws and regulations will be subject to interpretation by various courts and other governmental authorities, thus creating potentially complex compliance issues for us and our future customers and strategic partners. In addition, the California Consumer Privacy Act (“CCPA”) went into effect on January 1, 2020. The CCPA creates individual privacy rights for California consumers and increases the privacy and security obligations of entities handling certain personal information. The CCPA provides for civil penalties for violations, as well as a private right of action for data breaches that is expected to increase data breach litigation. The CCPA may increase our compliance costs and potential liability, and many similar laws have been proposed at the federal level and in other states. Further, the California Privacy Rights Act (“CPRA”) recently passed in California. The CPRA will impose additional data protection obligations on covered businesses, including additional consumer rights processes, limitations on data uses, new audit requirements for higher risk data, and opt outs for certain uses of sensitive data. It will also create a new California data protection agency authorized to issue substantive regulations and could result in increased privacy and information security enforcement. The majority of the provisions will go into effect on January 1, 2023, and additional compliance investment and potential business process changes may be required. In the event that we are subject to or affected by HIPAA, the CCPA, the CPRA or other domestic privacy and data protection laws, any liability from failure to comply with the requirements of these laws could adversely affect our financial condition.

In Europe, the European General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) went into effect in May 2018 and imposes strict requirements for processing the personal data of individuals within the EEA. Companies that must comply with the GDPR face increased compliance obligations and risk, including more robust regulatory enforcement of data protection requirements and potential fines for noncompliance of up to €20 million or 4% of the annual global revenues of the noncompliant company, whichever is greater. Among other requirements, the GDPR regulates transfers of personal data subject to the GDPR to third countries that have not been found to provide adequate protection to such personal data, including the United States, and the efficacy and longevity of current transfer mechanisms between the EU and the United States remains uncertain. Further, following the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the EU on January 31, 2020, and the expiration of the transition period, from January 1, 2021, from January 1, 2021, companies have had to comply with the GDPR and also the United Kingdom GDPR (the “UK GDPR”) which, together with the amended UK Data Protection Act 2018, retains the GDPR in UK national law. The UK GDPR mirrors the fines under the GDPR, i.e., fines up to the greater of €20 million (£17.5 million) or 4% of global turnover. The relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Union in relation to certain aspects of data protection law remains unclear, and it is unclear how United Kingdom data protection laws and regulations will develop in the medium to longer term.

49

Although we work to comply with applicable laws, regulations and standards, our contractual obligations and other legal obligations, these requirements are evolving and may be modified, interpreted and applied in an inconsistent manner from one jurisdiction to another, and may conflict with one another or other legal obligations with which we must comply. Any failure or perceived failure by us or our employees, representatives, contractors, consultants, collaborators, or other third parties to comply with such requirements or adequately address privacy and security concerns, even if unfounded, could result in additional cost and liability to us, damage our reputation, and adversely affect our business and results of operations.

We rely upon a combination of patents, trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect the intellectual property related to our products and technologies and to prevent third parties from copying and surpassing our achievements, thus eroding our competitive position in our market. Our success depends in large part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent protection for our platform technologies, product candidates and their uses, as well as our ability to operate without infringing the proprietary rights of others. We seek to protect our proprietary position by filing patent applications in the United States and abroad related to our novel discoveries and technologies that are important to our business. Our pending and future patent applications may not result in patents being issued or that issued patents will afford sufficient protection of our product candidates or their intended uses against competitors, nor can there be any assurance that the patents issued will not be infringed, designed around, invalidated by third parties, or effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive technologies, products or product candidates.

Composition of matter patents for biological and pharmaceutical product candidates often provide a strong form of intellectual property protection for those types of products, as such patents provide protection without regard to any method of use. We cannot be certain that the claims in our pending patent applications directed to composition of matter of our product candidates will be considered patentable by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) or by patent offices in foreign countries, or that the claims in any of our issued patents will be considered valid and enforceable by courts in the United States or foreign countries. Method of use patents protect the use of a product for the specified method. This type of patent does not prevent a competitor from making and marketing a product that is identical to our product for an indication that is outside the scope of the patented method.

The patenting process is expensive and time-consuming, and we may not be able to file and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner. In addition, we may not pursue or obtain patent protection in all relevant markets. It is possible that defects of form in the preparation or filing of our patents or patent applications may exist, or may arise in the future, for example with respect to proper priority claims, inventorship, claim scope, or requests for patent term adjustments. It is also possible that we will fail to identify patentable aspects of our research and development output before it is too late to obtain patent protection. The patent position of pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies generally is highly uncertain and involves complex legal and factual questions for which many legal principles remain unresolved. Our pending and future patent applications may not result in patents being issued in the United States or in other jurisdictions which protect our technology or products or which effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive technologies and products. There is no assurance that all of the potentially relevant prior art relating to our patents and patent applications has been found, which can invalidate a patent or prevent a patent from issuing from a pending patent application. Even if our patent applications issue as patents, they may not issue in a form that will provide us with any meaningful protection, prevent competitors from competing with us or otherwise provide us with any competitive advantage. Our competitors may be able to circumvent our owned or licensed patents by developing similar or alternative technologies or products in a non-infringing manner.

50

The issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its scope, validity or enforceability, and our owned and in-licensed patents may be challenged in the courts or patent offices in the United States and abroad. For example, our pending patent applications may be subject to third-party pre-issuance submissions of prior art to the USPTO or our issued patents may be subject to post-grant review proceedings, oppositions, derivations, reexaminations, or inter partes review proceedings, in the United States or elsewhere, challenging our patent rights or the patent rights of others. An adverse determination in any such challenges may result in loss of exclusivity or in patent claims being narrowed, invalidated, or held unenforceable, in whole or in part, which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical technologies and products, or limit the duration of the patent protection of our technologies and products. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of our patent rights are highly uncertain. If the breadth or strength of the claims of our patents and patent applications is threatened, regardless of the outcome, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to license, develop or commercialize our current product candidates or future product candidates, or could have a material adverse effect on our ability to raise funds necessary to continue our research programs or clinical trials.

Filing, prosecuting and defending patents on product candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the United States can be less extensive than those in the United States. In addition, the laws of some countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as laws in the United States. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside the United States, or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into the United States or other countries. Competitors may use our technologies in countries where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and further, may infringe our patents in territories where we have patent protection, but enforcement is not as strong as in the United States. These products may compete with our products and our patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.

Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in certain countries. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement or protection of patents, trade secrets and other intellectual property, particularly those relating to pharmaceutical and biotechnology products, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights generally. Proceedings to enforce our patent rights in foreign countries could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and our patent applications at risk of not issuing and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Accordingly, our efforts to protect or enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license.

Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuities fees and various other governmental fees on patents and/or patent applications are due to be paid to the USPTO and foreign patent agencies in several stages over the lifetime of the patent and/or patent application.

The USPTO and various foreign governmental patent agencies also require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions during the patent application process. While an inadvertent lapse, including due to the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on us or our patent maintenance vendors, can in many cases be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules, there are situations in which noncompliance can result in

51

abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. Non-compliance events that could result in abandonment or lapse of a patent or patent application include, but are not limited to, failure to respond to official actions within prescribed time limits, non-payment of fees and failure to properly legalize and submit formal documents. If we fail to maintain the patents and patent applications covering our product candidates, our competitive position would be adversely affected.

Patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States, if all maintenance fees are timely paid, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years from its earliest U.S. non-provisional filing date. Various extensions may be available, but the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. Even if patents covering our product candidates are obtained, once the patent life has expired for a product candidate, we may be open to competition. Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting such product candidates might expire before or shortly after such product candidates are commercialized. As a result, our patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing product candidates similar or identical to ours for a meaningful amount of time, or at all.

Depending upon the timing, duration and conditions of any FDA marketing approval of our product candidates, one or more of our U.S. patents may be eligible for limited patent term extension under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, referred to as the Hatch-Waxman Amendments, and similar legislation in the European Union and certain other countries. The Hatch-Waxman Amendments permit a patent term extension of up to five years for a patent covering an approved product as compensation for effective patent term lost during product development and the FDA regulatory review process. However, we may not receive an extension if we fail to exercise due diligence during the testing phase or regulatory review process, fail to apply within applicable deadlines, fail to apply prior to expiration of relevant patents or otherwise fail to satisfy applicable requirements. Moreover, the length of the extension could be less than we request. Only one patent per approved product can be extended, the extension cannot extend the total patent term beyond 14 years from approval and only those claims covering the approved drug, a method for using it or a method for manufacturing it may be extended. If we are unable to obtain patent term extension or the term of any such extension is less than we request, the period during which we can enforce our patent rights for the applicable product candidate will be shortened and our competitors may obtain approval to market competing products sooner. As a result, our revenue from applicable products could be reduced. Further, if this occurs, our competitors may take advantage of our investment in development and trials by referencing our clinical and preclinical data and launch their product earlier than might otherwise be expected, and our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be materially adversely affected.

Patent reform legislation in the United States and other countries, including the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (the “Leahy-Smith Act”), signed into law on September 16, 2011, could increase those uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents. The Leahy-Smith Act includes a number of significant changes to U.S. patent law, including provisions that affect the way patent applications are prosecuted, redefine prior art and provide more efficient and cost-effective avenues for competitors to challenge the validity of patents. These include allowing third-party submission of prior art to the USPTO during patent prosecution and additional procedures to attack the validity of a patent by USPTO administered post-grant proceedings, including post-grant review, inter partes review, and derivation proceedings. Further, because of a lower evidentiary standard in these USPTO post-grant proceedings compared to the evidentiary standard in United States federal courts necessary to invalidate a patent claim, a third party could potentially provide evidence in a USPTO proceeding sufficient for the USPTO to hold a claim invalid even though the same evidence would be insufficient to invalidate the claim if first presented in a district court action. Accordingly, a third party may attempt to use the USPTO procedures to invalidate our patent claims that

52

would not have been invalidated if first challenged by the third party as a defendant in a district court action. Thus, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

After March 2013, under the Leahy-Smith Act, the United States transitioned to a first inventor to file system in which, assuming that the other statutory requirements are met, the first inventor to file a patent application will be entitled to the patent on an invention regardless of whether a third-party was the first to invent the claimed invention. A third party that files a patent application in the USPTO after March 2013, but before we file an application covering the same invention, could therefore be awarded a patent covering an invention of ours even if we had made the invention before it was made by such third party. This will require us to be cognizant going forward of the time from invention to filing of a patent application. Since patent applications in the United States and most other countries are confidential for a period of time after filing or until issuance, we cannot be certain that we or our licensors were the first to either (i) file any patent application related to our product candidates and other proprietary technologies we may develop or (ii) invent any of the inventions claimed in our or our licensor’s patents or patent applications. Even where we have a valid and enforceable patent, we may not be able to exclude others from practicing the claimed invention where the other party can show that they used the invention in commerce before our filing date or the other party benefits from a compulsory license. However, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

In addition, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on several patent cases in recent years, either narrowing the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances or weakening the rights of patent owners in certain situations. In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to our ability to obtain patents in the future, this combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the value of patents, once obtained. Depending on actions by the U.S. Congress, the federal courts, and the USPTO, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that would weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce patents that we have licensed or that we might obtain in the future. Similarly, changes in patent law and regulations in other countries or jurisdictions or changes in the governmental bodies that enforce them or changes in how the relevant governmental authority enforces patent laws or regulations may weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce patents that we have licensed or that we may obtain in the future.

We are party to license agreements that enable us to utilize third party proprietary technologies in the development of our product candidates, and we may in the future enter into more license agreements with third parties under which we receive rights to intellectual property that are important to our business. These intellectual property license agreements may require us various development, regulatory and/or commercial diligence obligations, payment of milestones and/or royalties and other obligations. If we fail to comply with our obligations under these agreements (including as a result of COVID-19 impacting our operations), we use the licensed intellectual property in an unauthorized manner or we are subject to bankruptcy-related proceedings, the terms of the licenses may be materially modified, such as by rendering currently exclusive licenses non-exclusive, or it may give our licensors the right to terminate their respective agreement with us, which could limit our ability to implement our current business plan and materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We may also in the future enter into license agreements with third parties under which we are a sublicensee. If our sublicensor fails to comply with its obligations under its upstream license agreement with its licensor, the licensor may have the right to terminate the upstream license, which may terminate

53

our sublicense. If this were to occur, we would no longer have rights to the applicable intellectual property unless we are able to secure our own direct license with the owner of the relevant rights, which we may not be able to do on reasonable terms, or at all, which may impact our ability to continue to develop and commercialize our product candidates incorporating the relevant intellectual property.

In addition, we may not have the right to control the preparation, filing, prosecution, maintenance, enforcement and/or defense of patents and patent applications that are licensed to us. Consequently, our success will depend, in part, on the ability of our licensors to obtain, maintain and enforce patent protection for our licensed intellectual property, in particular, those patents to which we have secured exclusive rights, and any such licensed patents and patent applications may not be prepared, filed, prosecuted, maintained, enforced, and defended in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business. For instance, we cannot be certain that such activities by licensors have been or will be conducted in compliance with applicable laws and regulations or will result in valid and enforceable patents and other intellectual property rights. Further, it is possible that the licensors’ infringement proceeding or defense activities may be less vigorous than had we conducted them ourselves. If our current or future licensors, licensees or collaborators fail to prepare, file, prosecute, maintain, enforce, and defend licensed patents and other intellectual property rights, such rights may be reduced or eliminated, and our right to develop and commercialize our product candidates or technology that is the subject of such licensed rights could be adversely affected. In addition, our licensors may own or control intellectual property that has not been licensed to us and, as a result, we may be subject to claims, regardless of their merit, that we are infringing or otherwise violating the licensor’s rights.

Licensing of intellectual property is important to our business and involves complex legal, business and scientific issues and certain provisions in intellectual property license agreements may be susceptible to multiple interpretations. Disputes may arise between us and our licensors regarding intellectual property subject to a license agreement, including:

The resolution of any contract interpretation disagreement that may arise could narrow what we believe to be the scope of our rights to the relevant intellectual property or technology, or increase what we believe to be our financial or other obligations under the relevant agreement, either of which could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. If disputes over intellectual property that we have licensed prevent or impair our ability to maintain our current licensing arrangements on acceptable terms or at all, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize our product candidates. Moreover, any dispute or disagreement with our licensing partners may result in the delay or termination of the research, development or commercialization of our product candidates or any future product candidates, and may result in costly litigation or arbitration that diverts management attention and resources away from our day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our business, financial conditions, results of operations and prospects.

In addition, certain of our future agreements with third parties may limit or delay our ability to consummate certain transactions, may impact the value of those transactions, or may limit our ability to pursue certain activities. For example, we may in the future enter into license agreements that are not assignable or transferable, or that require the licensor’s express consent in order for an assignment or transfer to take place.

54

Our current and future licensors may retain certain rights under their agreements with us, including the right to use the underlying technology for noncommercial academic and research use, to publish general scientific findings from research related to the technology, and to make customary scientific and scholarly disclosures of information relating to the technology. It is difficult to monitor whether our licensors limit their use of the technology to these uses, and we could incur substantial expenses to enforce our rights to our licensed technology in the event of misuse.

In addition, the United States federal government retains certain rights in inventions produced with its financial assistance under the Patent and Trademark Law Amendments Act (the “Bayh-Dole Act”). The federal government retains a “nonexclusive, nontransferable, irrevocable, paid-up license” for its own benefit. The Bayh-Dole Act also provides federal agencies with “march-in rights.” March-in rights allow the government, in specified circumstances, to require the contractor or successors in title to the patent to grant a “nonexclusive, partially exclusive, or exclusive license” to a “responsible applicant or applicants.” If the patent owner refuses to do so, the government may grant the license itself. If, in the future, we co-own or license in technology which is critical to our business that is developed in whole or in part with federal funds subject to the Bayh-Dole Act, our ability to enforce or otherwise exploit patents covering such technology may be adversely affected.

It may be necessary for us to use the patented or proprietary technology of third parties to commercialize our products, in which case we would be required to obtain a license from these third parties. The licensing of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive area, and more established companies may pursue strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we may consider attractive or necessary. More established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, capital resources and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities. In addition, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us. We also may be unable to license or acquire third party intellectual property rights on terms that would allow us to make an appropriate return on our investment or at all. If we are unable to license such technology, or if we are forced to license such technology on unfavorable terms, our business could be materially harmed. If we are unable to obtain a necessary license, we may be unable to develop or commercialize our product candidates, which could materially harm our business, and the third parties owning such intellectual property rights could seek either an injunction prohibiting our sales, or, with respect to our sales, an obligation on our part to pay royalties and/or other forms of compensation. Even if we are able to obtain a license, it may be or become non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us.

Any of our intellectual property rights could be challenged or invalidated despite measures we take to obtain patent and other intellectual property protection with respect to our product candidates and proprietary technology. For example, if we were to initiate legal proceedings against a third party to enforce a patent covering one of our product candidates, the defendant could counterclaim that our patent is invalid and/or unenforceable. In patent litigation in the United States and in some other jurisdictions, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity and/or unenforceability are commonplace. Grounds for a validity challenge could be an alleged failure to meet any of several statutory requirements, for example, lack of novelty, obviousness or non-enablement. Grounds for an unenforceability assertion could be an allegation that someone connected with prosecution of the patent withheld material information from the USPTO or the applicable foreign counterpart, or made a misleading statement, during prosecution. A litigant or the USPTO itself could challenge our patents on this basis even if we believe that we have conducted our patent prosecution in accordance with the duty of candor and in good faith. The outcome following such a challenge is unpredictable.

55

With respect to challenges to the validity of our patents, there might be invalidating prior art, of which we and the patent examiner were unaware during prosecution. If a defendant were to prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity and/or unenforceability, we would lose at least part, and perhaps all, of the patent protection on a product candidate. Even if a defendant does not prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity and/or unenforceability, our patent claims may be construed in a manner that would limit our ability to enforce such claims against the defendant and others. The cost of defending such a challenge, particularly in a foreign jurisdiction, and any resulting loss of patent protection could have a material adverse impact on one or more of our product candidates and our business. Enforcing our intellectual property rights against third parties may also cause such third parties to file other counterclaims against us, which could be costly to defend, particularly in a foreign jurisdiction, and could require us to pay substantial damages, cease the sale of certain products or enter into a license agreement and pay royalties, which may not be possible on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Any efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights are also likely to be costly and may divert the efforts of our scientific and management personnel.

Our commercial success will depend in part on not infringing the patents or violating the other proprietary rights of others. Significant litigation regarding patent rights occurs in our industry. Because the intellectual property landscape in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industry is rapidly evolving and interdisciplinary, it is difficult to conclusively assess our freedom to operate without infringing on third party rights. Our competitors in both the United States and abroad, many of which have substantially greater resources and have made substantial investments in patent portfolios and competing technologies, may have applied for or obtained or may in the future apply for and obtain, patents that will prevent, limit or otherwise interfere with our ability to make, use and sell our products. We do not always conduct independent reviews of patents issued to third parties. In addition, patent applications in the United States and elsewhere can be pending for many years before issuance, or unintentionally abandoned patents or applications can be revived, so there may be applications of others now pending or recently revived patents of which we are unaware. These applications may later result in issued patents, or the revival of previously abandoned patents, that will prevent, limit or otherwise interfere with our ability to make, use or sell our products.

There is a substantial amount of litigation involving patent and other intellectual property rights in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries generally. Third parties may, in the future, assert claims that we are employing their proprietary technology without authorization, including claims from competitors or from non-practicing entities that have no relevant product revenue and against whom our own patent portfolio may have no deterrent effect. As we continue to commercialize our products in their current or updated forms, launch new products and enter new markets, we expect competitors may claim that one or more of our products infringe their intellectual property rights as part of business strategies designed to impede our successful commercialization and entry into new markets. The large number of patents, the rapid rate of new patent applications and issuances, the complexities of the technology involved, and the uncertainty of litigation may increase the risk of business resources and management’s attention being diverted to patent litigation. We have, and we may in the future, receive letters or other threats or claims from third parties inviting us to take licenses under, or alleging that we infringe, their patents.

Moreover, we may become party to future adversarial proceedings regarding our patent portfolio or the patents of third parties. Such proceedings could include supplemental examination or contested post-grant proceedings such as review, reexamination, inter parties review, interference or derivation proceedings before the USPTO and challenges in U.S. District Court. Because of a lower evidentiary standard in USPTO proceedings compared to the evidentiary standard in United States federal courts necessary to invalidate a patent claim, a third party could potentially provide evidence in a USPTO proceeding sufficient for the USPTO to hold a claim invalid even though the same evidence would be insufficient to invalidate the claim if first presented in a district court action. Accordingly, a third party may attempt to use the USPTO procedures to invalidate our patent claims that would not have been invalidated if first challenged by the third party as a defendant in a district court action. Also, our patents

56

may be subjected to opposition, post-grant review or comparable proceedings lodged in various foreign, both national and regional, patent offices.

The legal threshold for initiating litigation or contested proceedings may be low, so that even lawsuits or proceedings with a low probability of success might be initiated. Litigation and contested proceedings can also be expensive and time-consuming, and our adversaries in these proceedings may have the ability to dedicate substantially greater resources to prosecuting these legal actions than we can. In addition, any uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of any litigation could have a material adverse effect on our ability to raise the funds necessary to continue our operations or could otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects. We may also occasionally use these proceedings to challenge the patent rights of others. We cannot be certain that any particular challenge will be successful in limiting or eliminating the challenged patent rights of the third party.

Any lawsuits resulting from such allegations could subject us to significant liability for damages and invalidate our proprietary rights. Any potential intellectual property litigation also could force us to do one or more of the following:

Any litigation or claim against us, even those without merit, may cause us to incur substantial costs, and could place a significant strain on our financial resources, divert the attention of management from our core business and harm our reputation.

If we are found to infringe the intellectual property rights of third parties, we could be required to pay substantial damages, which may be increased up to three times of awarded damages, and/or substantial royalties and could be prevented from selling our products unless we obtain a license or are able to redesign our products to avoid infringement. Any such license may not be available on reasonable terms, if at all, and there can be no assurance that we would be able to redesign our products in a way that would not infringe the intellectual property rights of others. We could encounter delays in product introductions while we attempt to develop alternative methods or products. If we fail to obtain any required licenses or make any necessary changes to our products or technologies, we may have to withdraw existing products from the market or may be unable to commercialize one or more of our products.

Further, competitors or third parties may infringe or otherwise violate our intellectual property. To counter infringement or other violations, we may be required to file claims, which can be expensive and time consuming. Any such claims could provoke these parties to assert counterclaims against us, including claims alleging that we infringe their patents or other intellectual property rights. In addition, in a patent infringement proceeding, a court may decide that one or more of the patents we assert is invalid or unenforceable, in whole or in part, construe the patent’s claims narrowly or refuse to prevent the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that our patents do not cover the technology. Similarly, if we assert trademark infringement claims, a court may determine that the marks we have asserted are invalid or unenforceable or that the party against whom we have asserted trademark infringement has superior rights to the marks in question. In such a case, we could ultimately be forced to

57

cease use of such marks. In any intellectual property litigation, even if we are successful, any award of monetary damages or other remedy we receive may not be commercially valuable. If a defendant were to prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity and/or unenforceability, we would lose at least part, and perhaps all, of the patent protection on such product candidate. In addition, if the breadth or strength of protection provided by our patents and patent applications or those of our future licensors is threatened, it could dissuade other companies from collaborating with us to license, develop or commercialize current or future product candidates. Such a loss of patent protection would have a material adverse impact on our business.

Also, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation or other legal proceedings relating to our intellectual property rights, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation or other proceedings.

In addition, if our current or future product candidates are found to infringe the intellectual property rights of third parties, these third parties may assert infringement claims against our licensees and other parties with whom we have business relationships, and we may be required to indemnify those parties for any damages they suffer as a result of these claims. Such claims may require us to initiate or defend protracted and costly litigation on behalf of licensees and other parties regardless of the merits of these claims. If any of these claims succeed, we may be forced to pay damages on behalf of those parties or may be required to obtain licenses for the products they use.

During the course of any intellectual property litigation, there could be public announcements of the initiation of the litigation as well as results of hearings, rulings on motions and other interim proceedings in the litigation. If securities analysts or investors regard these announcements as negative, the perceived value of our existing products, programs or intellectual property could be diminished.

Because of the expense and uncertainty of litigation, we may conclude that even if a third-party is infringing our issued patent, any patents that may be issued as a result of our pending or future patent applications or other intellectual property rights, the risk-adjusted cost of bringing and enforcing such a claim or action may be too high or not in the best interest of our company or our shareholders, or it may be otherwise impractical or undesirable to enforce our intellectual property against some third parties. Our competitors or other third parties may be able to sustain the costs of complex patent litigation or proceedings more effectively than we can because of their greater financial resources and more mature and developed intellectual property portfolios. In such cases, we may decide that the more prudent course of action is to simply monitor the situation or initiate or seek some other non-litigious action or solution. In addition, the uncertainties associated with litigation could compromise our ability to raise the funds necessary to continue our clinical trials, continue our internal research programs, in-license needed technologies or other product candidates, or enter into development partnerships that would help us bring our product candidates to market.

We cannot guarantee that any of our patent searches or analyses, including the identification of relevant patents, the scope of patent claims or the expiration of relevant patents, are complete or thorough, nor can we be certain that we have identified each and every third-party patent and pending application in the United States and abroad that is relevant to or necessary for the commercialization of our product candidates in any jurisdiction.

The scope of a patent claim is determined by an interpretation of the law, the written disclosure in a patent and the patent’s prosecution history. Our interpretation of the relevance or the scope of a patent or a pending application may be incorrect. For example, we may incorrectly determine that our products are not covered by a third-party patent or may incorrectly predict whether a third-party’s pending application

58

will issue with claims of relevant scope. Our determination of the expiration date of any patent in the United States or abroad that we consider relevant may be incorrect. Our failure to identify and correctly interpret relevant patents may negatively impact our ability to develop and market our products.

We may be subject to claims that former employees, collaborators or other third parties have an interest in our patents or other intellectual property as an inventor or co-inventor. The failure to name the proper inventors on a patent application can result in the patents issuing thereon being unenforceable. Inventorship disputes may arise from conflicting views regarding the contributions of different individuals named as inventors, the effects of foreign laws where foreign nationals are involved in the development of the subject matter of the patent, conflicting obligations of third parties involved in developing our product candidates or as a result of questions regarding co-ownership of potential joint inventions. Litigation may be necessary to resolve these and other claims challenging inventorship and/or ownership. Alternatively, or additionally, we may enter into agreements to clarify the scope of our rights in such intellectual property. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, valuable intellectual property. Such an outcome could have a material adverse effect on our business. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees.

Our licensors may have relied on third-party consultants or collaborators or on funds from third parties, such as the U.S. government, such that our licensors are not the sole and exclusive owners of the patents we in-licensed. If other third parties have ownership rights or other rights to our in-licensed patents, they may be able to license such patents to our competitors, and our competitors could market competing products and technology. This could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial conditions, results of operations, and prospects.

In addition, while it is our policy to require our employees and contractors who may be involved in the conception or development of intellectual property to execute agreements assigning such intellectual property to us, we may be unsuccessful in executing such an agreement with each party who, in fact, conceives or develops intellectual property that we regard as our own. The assignment of intellectual property rights may not be self-executing, or the assignment agreements may be breached, and we may be forced to bring claims against third parties, or defend claims that they may bring against us, to determine the ownership of what we regard as our intellectual property. Such claims could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

We also rely on trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect proprietary know-how that is not patentable, processes for which patents are difficult to enforce and any other elements of our discovery and development processes that involve proprietary know-how, information or technology that is not covered by patents. Elements of our product candidates, including processes for their preparation and manufacture, may involve proprietary know-how, information, or technology that is not covered by patents, and thus for these aspects we may consider trade secrets and know-how to be our primary intellectual property. We may also rely on trade secret protection as temporary protection for concepts that may be included in a future patent filing. Any disclosure, either intentional or unintentional, by our employees, the employees of third parties with whom we share our facilities or third-party consultants and vendors that we engage to perform research, clinical trials or manufacturing activities, or misappropriation by third parties (such as through a cybersecurity breach) of our trade secrets or proprietary information could enable competitors to duplicate or surpass our technological achievements, thus eroding our competitive position in our market. Because we expect to rely on third parties in the development and manufacture of our product candidates, we must, at times, share trade secrets with them. Our reliance on third parties requires us to share our trade secrets, which increases the possibility that a competitor will discover them or that our trade secrets will be misappropriated or disclosed.

59

Trade secrets and know-how can be difficult to protect. We require our employees to enter into written employment agreements containing provisions of confidentiality and non-disclosure obligations. We further seek to protect our potential trade secrets, proprietary know-how, and information in part, by entering into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who are given access to them, such as our corporate collaborators, outside scientific collaborators, contract research organizations, contract manufacturers, consultants, advisors and other third parties. With our consultants, contractors, and outside scientific collaborators, these agreements typically include invention assignment obligations. We cannot guarantee that we have entered into such agreements with each party that may have or has had access to our trade secrets or proprietary technology and processes. We cannot be certain that our trade secrets and other confidential proprietary information will not be disclosed or that competitors will not otherwise gain access to our trade secrets or independently develop substantially equivalent information and techniques. Despite these efforts, any of these parties may breach the agreements and disclose our proprietary information, including our trade secrets, and we may not be able to obtain adequate remedies for such breaches. Enforcing a claim that a party illegally disclosed or misappropriated a trade secret is difficult, expensive and time-consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. In addition, some courts inside and outside the United States are less willing or unwilling to protect trade secrets. We may need to share our proprietary information, including trade secrets, with future business partners, collaborators, contractors and others located in countries at heightened risk of theft of trade secrets, including through direct intrusion by private parties or foreign actors, and those affiliated with or controlled by state actors. Further, if any of our trade secrets were to be lawfully obtained or independently developed by a competitor or other third-party, we would have no right to prevent them from using that technology or information to compete with us. If any of our trade secrets were to be disclosed to or independently developed by a competitor or other third-party, our competitive position would be harmed.

We also seek to preserve the integrity and confidentiality of our data and trade secrets by maintaining physical security of our premises and physical and electronic security of our information technology systems. While we have confidence in these individuals, organizations and systems, agreements or security measures may be breached, and we may not have adequate remedies for any breach.

As is common in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, we employ individuals and engage the services of consultants who previously worked for other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, including our competitors or potential competitors. Although no claims against us are currently pending, we may be subject to claims that these employees or we have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed trade secrets or other proprietary information of their former employers, or that our consultants have used or disclosed trade secrets or other proprietary information of their former or current clients. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation or other legal proceedings relating to intellectual property claims may cause us to incur significant expenses, and could distract our technical and management personnel from their normal responsibilities.

Our trademarks or trade names may be challenged, opposed, infringed, circumvented, invalidated, cancelled, declared generic, determined to be not entitled to registration, or determined to be infringing on other marks. During trademark registration proceedings, we may receive rejections of our applications by the USPTO or in foreign jurisdictions. Although we would be given an opportunity to respond to those rejections, we may be unable to overcome such rejections. In addition, in the USPTO and in comparable agencies in many foreign jurisdictions, third parties are given an opportunity to oppose pending trademark applications and to seek to cancel registered trademarks. Opposition or cancellation proceedings may be filed against our trademarks, and our trademarks may not survive such proceedings. Any trademark

60

litigation could be expensive. In addition, we could be found liable for significant monetary damages, including treble damages, disgorgement of profits and attorneys’ fees, if we are found to have willfully infringed a trademark. We may not be able to protect our exclusive right to these trademarks and trade names or may be forced to stop using these names, which we need for name recognition by potential collaborators or customers in our markets of interest. If we are unable to establish name recognition based on our trademarks and trade names, we may not be able to compete effectively and our business may be adversely affected. We may license our trademarks and trade names to third parties, such as distributors. Though these license agreements may provide guidelines for how our trademarks and trade names may be used, a breach of these agreements or misuse of our trademarks and tradenames by our licensees may jeopardize our rights in or diminish the goodwill associated with our trademarks and trade names.

Moreover, any name we have proposed to use with our product candidates in the United States must be approved by the FDA, regardless of whether we have registered it, or applied to register it, as a trademark. Similar requirements exist in Europe. The FDA typically conducts a review of proposed product names, including an evaluation of potential for confusion with other product names. If the FDA (or an equivalent administrative body in a foreign jurisdiction) objects to any of our proposed proprietary product names, it may be required to expend significant additional resources in an effort to identify a suitable substitute name that would qualify under applicable trademark laws, not infringe the existing rights of third parties and be acceptable to the FDA. Furthermore, in many countries, owning and maintaining a trademark registration may not provide an adequate defense against a subsequent infringement claim asserted by the owner of a senior trademark.

The trading price of our ordinary shares have been and may continue to be volatile on the ASX market and the trading price of our ADSs could be highly volatile and could be subject to wide fluctuations in response to various factors, some of which are beyond our control. These factors include those discussed in this “Risk Factors” section of this Annual Report and positive, negative or unexpected developments relating to:

61

In addition, the stock markets in general, and the markets for biotechnology and pharmaceutical stocks in particular, have experienced extreme volatility that may have been unrelated to the operating performance of the issuer. These broad market fluctuations may adversely affect the trading price or liquidity of our ordinary shares or ADSs. In the past, when the market price of a stock has been volatile, holders of that stock have sometimes instituted securities class action litigation against the issuer. If any of our shareholders were to bring such a lawsuit against us, we could incur substantial costs defending the lawsuit and the attention of our senior management would be diverted from the operation of our business, which could seriously harm our financial position. Any adverse determination in litigation could also subject us to significant liabilities.

Although our financial results are reported in Australian Dollars, historically a portion of our operating expenses and a substantial portion of our revenue have been denominated in currencies other than the Australian Dollar. As a result, changes in the exchange rate between the Australian Dollar and other currencies, particularly the U.S. Dollar, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition that could adversely affect the trading price of our ADSs. Accordingly, volatility in foreign currency exchange rates may have a material adverse impact on our financial condition, results of operations and liquidity and distort period-to-period comparisons of our financial condition and operating results. We have not historically used foreign exchange contracts to help manage foreign exchange rate exposures.

From time to time, the global credit and financial markets have experienced extreme volatility and disruptions, including severely diminished liquidity and credit availability, declines in consumer confidence, declines in economic growth, increases in unemployment rates and uncertainty about economic stability. There can be no assurance that future deterioration in credit and financial markets and confidence in economic conditions will not occur. Our business strategy and performance may be adversely affected by any such economic downturn, volatile business environment or continued unpredictable and unstable market conditions. The financial markets and the global economy may also be adversely affected by the current or anticipated impact of military conflict, including the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, terrorism or other geopolitical events. Sanctions imposed by the United States and other countries in response to such conflicts, including the conflict in Ukraine, may also adversely impact the financial markets and the global economy, and any economic countermeasures by the affected countries or others could exacerbate market and economic instability. If the current equity and credit markets deteriorate, it may make any necessary debt or equity financing more difficult, more costly and more dilutive. Failure to secure any necessary financing in a timely manner and on favorable terms could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations and the price of our ADSs.

62

If we fail to satisfy the continued listing requirements of Nasdaq, such as the corporate governance requirements or the minimum closing bid price requirement, Nasdaq may take steps to delist our ADSs. Such a de-listing would likely have a negative effect on the price of our ADSs and would impair the ability of investors to sell or purchase our ADSs when any investor may wish to do so. In the event of a de-listing, we can provide no assurance that any action taken by us to restore compliance with listing requirements would allow our ADSs to become listed again, stabilize the market price or improve the liquidity of our ADSs, prevent our ADSs from dropping below the Nasdaq minimum bid price requirement or prevent future non-compliance with Nasdaq’s listing requirements.

Sales of a substantial number of our ADSs or ordinary shares in the public market or the perception that these sales may occur could significantly reduce the market price of our ADSs and impair our ability to raise adequate capital. We have a total of 1,881,408 ADSs outstanding and 1,353,350,744 ordinary shares outstanding (including 338,653,440 ordinary shares underlying our ADSs), assuming no exercise of outstanding options, which are freely tradable, without restriction, in the public market, unless they are held or purchased by one of our affiliates. ADSs held by our affiliates are eligible for sale in the public market and will be subject to volume limitations under Rule 144 under the Securities Act.

We may from time to time distribute rights to our shareholders, including rights to acquire our securities. However, we cannot make rights available to investors in the United States unless we register the rights and the securities to which the rights relate under the Securities Act or an exemption from the registration requirements is available. Also, under the deposit agreement, the depositary bank will not make rights available to investors unless either both the rights and any related securities are registered under the Securities Act, or the distribution of them to ADS holders is exempted from registration under the Securities Act. We are under no obligation to file a registration statement with respect to any such rights or securities or to endeavor to cause such a registration statement to be declared effective. Moreover, we may not be able to establish an exemption from registration under the Securities Act. If the depositary does not distribute the rights, it may, under the deposit agreement, either sell them, if possible, or allow them to lapse. Accordingly, investors may be unable to participate in our rights offerings and may experience dilution in holdings in our ADSs.

Our executive officers, directors, principal shareholders and their affiliates represent, based on their ownership of our outstanding ordinary shares as of June 30, 2022 and beneficial ownership, in the aggregate, of approximately 32% of our outstanding ordinary shares, assuming no exercise of outstanding options and warrants to acquire additional ordinary shares. Furthermore, many of our current directors were appointed by our principal shareholders. As a result, such persons or their appointees to our board of directors, acting together, have and will continue to have the ability to control or significantly influence all matters submitted to our board of directors or shareholders for approval, including the appointment of our management, the election and removal of directors and approval of any significant transaction, as well as our management and business affairs. This concentration of ownership may have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a change in control, impeding a merger, consolidation, takeover or other business combination involving us, or discouraging a potential acquiror from making a tender offer or otherwise attempting to obtain control of our business, even if such a transaction would benefit other shareholders. The concentration of voting power among these shareholders may have an adverse effect on the price of our ADSs. In addition, this concentration of ownership might adversely affect the market price of our ADSs by:

63

We can provide no assurance that we will be able to maintain an active trading market for our ADSs. The lack of an active market may impair the ability of any investor to sell our ADSs at the time an investor may wish to sell them or at a price that an investor may consider reasonable. An inactive market may also impair our ability to raise capital by selling shares and may impair our ability to acquire other businesses or technologies using our shares as consideration, which, in turn, could materially adversely affect our business.

In addition to our ADSs being listed on Nasdaq, our ordinary shares continue to be listed on the ASX. We cannot predict the effect of this dual listing on the value of our ordinary shares and ADSs. However, the dual listing of our ordinary shares and ADSs may dilute the liquidity of these securities in one or both markets and may impair the development of an active trading market for the ADSs in the United States. The trading price of the ADSs could also be adversely affected by trading in our ordinary shares on the ASX.

Our ordinary shares have been traded on the ASX since 1999, and our ADSs are traded on Nasdaq. Trading in our securities on these markets will take place in different currencies (U.S. dollars on Nasdaq and Australian dollars on the ASX), and at different times (resulting from different time zones, trading days and public holidays in the United States and Australia). The trading prices of our securities on these two markets may differ due to these and other factors, including the fact that ASX and Nasdaq have different criteria for trading halts as well as different listing rules and disclosure requirements. Any decrease in the price of our ordinary shares on the ASX could cause a decrease in the trading price of our ADSs on Nasdaq.

ADS holders do not hold ordinary shares directly and, as such, are subject to, among others, the following additional risks:

The deposit agreement provides that the depositary will not make rights available to ADS holders unless the distribution to ADS holders of both the rights and any related securities are either registered under the Securities Act or exempted from registration under the Securities Act. If we offer holders of our ordinary shares the option to receive dividends in either cash or shares, under the deposit agreement the depositary may require satisfactory assurances from us that extending the offer to holders of ADSs does not require registration of any securities under the Securities Act before making the option available to holders of ADSs. We are under no obligation to file a registration statement with respect to any such

64

rights or securities or to endeavor to cause such a registration statement to be declared effective. Moreover, we may not be able to establish an exemption from registration under the Securities Act. Accordingly, ADS holders may be unable to participate in our rights offerings or to elect to receive dividends in shares and may experience dilution in their holdings. In addition, if the depositary is unable to sell rights that are not exercised or not distributed or if the sale is not lawful or reasonably practicable, it will allow the rights to lapse, in which case ADS holders will receive no value for these rights.

Our ADSs are transferable on the books of the depositary. However, the depositary may close its books at any time or from time to time when it deems expedient in connection with the performance of its duties. The depositary may refuse to deliver, transfer or register transfers of ADSs generally when our books or the books of the depositary are closed, or at any time if we or the depositary think it is advisable to do so because of any requirement of law, government or governmental body, or under any provision of the deposit agreement, or for any other reason subject to the right to cancel held ADSs and withdraw the underlying ordinary shares. Temporary delays in the surrendering of our ADSs and withdrawal of the underlying ordinary shares may arise because the depositary has closed its transfer books or we have closed our transfer books, the transfer of ordinary shares is blocked to permit voting at a shareholders’ meeting or we are paying a dividend on our ordinary shares. In addition, ADS holders may not be able to cancel their ADSs and withdraw the underlying ordinary shares when they owe money for fees, taxes and similar charges and when it is necessary to prohibit withdrawals in order to comply with any laws or governmental regulations that apply to ADSs or to the withdrawal of ordinary shares or other deposited securities.

We will not treat holders of our ADS (and not the ordinary shares underlying the ADSs) as one of our shareholders, and they will not be able to exercise shareholder rights directly. The ADR depositary will be the holder of the ordinary shares underlying holders’ ADSs, and ADS holders will be able to exercise voting rights with respect to the ordinary shares represented by the ADSs only in accordance with the deposit agreement relating to the ADSs. There are practical limitations on the ability of ADS holders to exercise their voting rights due to the additional procedural steps involved in communicating with these holders. For example, holders of our ordinary shares will receive notice of shareholders’ meetings by mail and will be able to exercise their voting rights by either attending the shareholders meeting in person or voting by proxy. ADS holders, by comparison, will not receive notice directly from us. Instead, in accordance with the deposit agreement, we will provide notice to the ADR depositary of any such shareholders meeting and details concerning the matters to be voted upon at least 30 days in advance of the meeting date. If we so instruct, the ADR depositary will mail to holders of ADSs the notice of the meeting and a statement as to the manner in which voting instructions may be given by holders as soon as practicable after receiving notice from us of any such meeting. To exercise their voting rights, ADS holders must then instruct the ADR depositary as to voting the ordinary shares represented by their ADSs. Due to these procedural steps involving the ADR depositary, the process for exercising voting rights may take longer for ADS holders than for holders of ordinary shares. The ordinary shares represented by ADSs for which the ADR depositary fails to receive timely voting instructions will not be voted.

A non-U.S. corporation will be considered a “passive foreign investment company” (“PFIC”) for any taxable year if (i) at least 75% of its gross income is passive income, or (ii) at least 50% of the value of its assets (generally based on an average of the quarterly values of the assets during a taxable year) is attributable to assets that produce or are held for the production of passive income. For purposes of the above calculations, a non-U.S. corporation that owns, directly or indirectly, at least 25% by value of the shares of another corporation is treated as if it held its proportionate share of the assets of the other corporation and received directly its proportionate share of the income of the other corporation. Passive

65

income generally includes dividends, interest, certain rents or royalties, foreign currency or other investment gains and certain other categories of income.

Based on the value of Bionomics Limited’s assets for its taxable year ending June 30, 2022, including the value of its goodwill, and the composition of its income and assets in such taxable year, we do not believe Bionomics Limited was a “passive foreign investment company” (“PFIC”) for its taxable year ending June 30, 2022. However, the application of the PFIC rules is subject to uncertainty in several respects. Furthermore, a separate determination must be made after the close of each taxable year as to whether Bionomics Limited is a PFIC for that year, based on its income for the entire year and the value of its assets throughout the year. Accordingly, we cannot assure that Bionomics Limited was not a PFIC for its taxable year ending June 30, 2022 or that it will not be a PFIC for its current taxable year or any future taxable year. In particular, Bionomics Limited’s PFIC status may depend, in part, on the receipt and treatment of other sources of income (including government grants) and having active income from other sources in excess of passive income from investments. For purposes of the asset test described above, goodwill is generally characterized as an active asset to the extent it is associated with business activities that produce active income, and the value of Bionomics Limited’s assets, including goodwill, generally is determined by reference to the market price of our ADSs or ordinary shares, which may fluctuate considerably, especially in times of high market volatility. Cash is generally characterized as a passive asset for these purposes, so the composition of Bionomics Limited’s income and assets will be affected by how, and how quickly, it spends the cash it holds. If Bionomics Limited were to be treated as a PFIC for any taxable year during which a U.S. Holder (as defined below under “Taxation—U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations”) holds an ADS or ordinary share, certain adverse U.S. federal income tax consequences could apply to such U.S. Holder. See “Taxation—U.S. Federal Income Tax Considerations—Passive Foreign Investment Company Considerations.”

If a United States person is treated as owning, directly, indirectly or constructively, at least 10% of the value or voting power of Bionomic Limited’s ordinary shares or ADSs, such person may be treated as a “United States shareholder” with respect to each “controlled foreign corporation” in our group, if any. If our group includes one or more U.S. subsidiaries (as is currently the case), certain of our non-U.S. subsidiaries could be treated as controlled foreign corporations (even if Bionomics Limited is not treated as a controlled foreign corporation). A United States shareholder of a controlled foreign corporation may be required to annually report and include in its U.S. taxable income its pro rata share of “Subpart F income,” “global intangible low-taxed income” and investments in U.S. property by controlled foreign corporations, regardless of whether we make any distributions. An individual that is a United States shareholder with respect to a controlled foreign corporation generally would not be allowed certain tax deductions or foreign tax credits that would be allowed to a United States shareholder that is a U.S. corporation. Failure to comply with controlled foreign corporation reporting obligations may subject a United States shareholder to significant monetary penalties and may prevent the statute of limitations with respect to such United States shareholder’s U.S. federal income tax return for the year for which reporting was due from starting. We cannot provide any assurances that we will assist investors in determining whether any of our non-U.S. subsidiaries is treated as a controlled foreign corporation or whether such investor is treated as a United States shareholder with respect to any of such controlled foreign corporations or that we will furnish to any investors information that may be necessary to comply with the reporting and tax paying obligations applicable under the controlled foreign corporation rules of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”). U.S. investors should consult their tax advisors regarding the potential application of these rules to their investment in our ordinary shares or ADSs.

While we do not anticipate paying any dividends on our ordinary shares in the foreseeable future, if such a dividend is declared, the depositary for the ADSs has agreed to pay the cash dividends or other distributions it or the custodian receives on our ordinary shares or other deposited securities after

66

deducting its fees and expenses. ADS holders will receive these dividends in proportion to the number of our ordinary shares such ADSs represent. However, in accordance with the limitations set forth in the deposit agreement, it may be unlawful or impractical to make a dividend available to holders of ADSs. We have no obligation to take any other action to permit the dividend of the ADSs, ordinary shares, rights or anything else to holders of the ADSs.

This means that holders of our ADSs may not receive the dividends we make on our ordinary shares or any value from them if it is unlawful or impractical to make them available. These restrictions may have a material adverse effect on the value of holders’ ADSs. In addition, exchange rate fluctuations may affect the amount of Australian dollars that we are able to distribute, and the amount in U.S. dollars that our shareholders receive upon the payment of cash dividends or other distributions we declare and pay in Australian dollars, if any. These factors could harm the value of the ADSs, and, in turn, the U.S. dollar proceeds that holders receive from the sale of the ADSs.

We are an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the JOBS Act, and we take advantage of certain exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies including, but not limited to, not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404, reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and any proxy statements, exemptions from the requirements of holding a nonbinding advisory vote on executive compensation and shareholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved. We have also elected to rely on an exemption that permits an emerging growth company to include only two years of audited financial statements and only two years of related management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations disclosure, and we have therefore only included two years of audited financial statements, selected financial data and management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations in this Annual Report. We cannot predict if investors will find our ADSs less attractive because we rely on these exemptions. If some investors find our ADSs less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our ADSs and the trading price of our ADSs may be more volatile. We may take advantage of these reporting exemptions until we are no longer an emerging growth company. We will remain an emerging growth company until the earlier of (1) the last day of the fiscal year (a) following the fifth anniversary of the closing of our initial public offering, (b) in which we have total annual gross revenue of at least $1.07 billion or (c) in which we are deemed to be a large accelerated filer, which requires the market value of our ADSs that are held by non-affiliates to exceed $700 million as of the prior June 30th, and (2) the date on which we have issued more than $1 billion in non-convertible debt during the prior three-year period.

We are exempted from certain corporate governance requirements of Nasdaq by virtue of being a foreign private issuer. As a foreign private issuer, we are permitted to follow the governance practices of our home country, Australia, in lieu of certain corporate governance requirements of Nasdaq. As result, the standards applicable to us are considerably different than the standards applied to domestic U.S. issuers. For instance, we are not required to:

Although we do not currently intend to rely these “home country” exemptions, we may rely on some of these exemptions in the future. As a result, our shareholders may not be provided with the benefits of certain corporate governance requirements of Nasdaq.

67

As a “foreign private issuer,” we are exempt from certain rules under the Exchange Act, that impose certain disclosure obligations and procedural requirements for proxy solicitations under Section 14 of the Exchange Act. In addition, our officers, directors and principal shareholders are exempt from the reporting and “short-swing” profit recovery provisions of Section 16 of the Exchange Act and the rules under the Exchange Act that deal with purchases and sales of the ADSs or our ordinary shares. Moreover, we are not required to file periodic reports and financial statements with the SEC as frequently or as promptly as U.S. companies whose securities are registered under the Exchange Act. In addition, we are not required to comply with Regulation FD, which restricts the selective disclosure of material information. As a result of this classification, there may be less publicly available information concerning us than there is for U.S. public companies.

As discussed above, we are a foreign private issuer, and therefore, we are not required to comply with all of the periodic disclosure and current reporting requirements of the Exchange Act. The determination of foreign private issuer status is made annually on the last business day of an issuer’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter. We would lose our foreign private issuer status if, for example, more than 50% of our ordinary shares are directly or indirectly held by residents of the United States and we fail to meet additional requirements necessary to maintain our foreign private issuer status. If we lose our foreign private issuer status on this date, we will be required to file with the SEC periodic reports and registration statements on U.S. domestic issuer forms, which are more detailed and extensive than the forms available to a foreign private issuer. We will also have to mandatorily comply with U.S. federal proxy requirements, and our officers, directors and principal shareholders will become subject to the short-swing profit disclosure and recovery provisions of Section 16 of the Exchange Act. In addition, we will lose our ability to rely upon exemptions from certain corporate governance requirements under the Nasdaq listing rules. As a U.S. listed public company that is not a foreign private issuer, we will incur significant additional legal, accounting and other expenses that we will not incur as a foreign private issuer, and accounting, reporting and other expenses in order to maintain a listing on a U.S. securities exchange.

Currently we report our financial statements under IFRS. There have been and there may in the future be certain significant differences between IFRS and U.S. GAAP, including differences related to revenue recognition, intangible assets, share-based compensation expense, income tax and earnings per share. As a result, our financial information and reported earnings for historical or future periods could be significantly different if they were prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP. In addition, we do not intend to provide a reconciliation between IFRS and U.S. GAAP unless it is required under applicable law. As a result, it may be difficult to meaningfully compare our financial statements under IFRS with those companies that prepare financial statements under U.S. GAAP.

We are incorporated in Australia and are subject to the takeover laws of Australia. Among other things, we are subject to the Corporations Act. Subject to a range of exceptions, the Corporations Act prohibits the acquisition of a direct or indirect interest in our issued voting shares if the acquisition of that interest will lead to a person’s “voting power” (as defined) in us increasing to more than 20%, or increasing from a starting point that is above 20% and below 90%. Australian takeover laws may discourage takeover offers being made for us or may discourage the acquisition of a significant position in our outstanding ordinary shares.

This may have the ancillary effect of entrenching our board of directors and depriving or limiting our shareholders’ or ADS holders’ opportunity to sell their ordinary shares or ADSs and may further restrict

68

the ability of our shareholders and ADS holders to obtain a premium from such transactions. See “Description of Share Capital—Change of Control”.

As an Australian company, we are subject to different corporate requirements than a corporation organized under the laws of the states of the United States. Our Constitution, as well as the Corporations Act and the ASX Listing Rules, set forth various rights and obligations that are applicable to us as an Australian company listed on the ASX. These requirements may operate differently than those of many U.S. companies. Holders of our ADSs should carefully review the summary of these matters set forth under the section entitled “Description of Share Capital,” as well as our Constitution, which is included as an exhibit to this Annual Report, prior to investing in the ADSs.

We are incorporated under the laws of Australia and conduct substantially all of our operations in Australia. The majority of our directors and officers and certain other persons named in this Annual Report are citizens and residents of countries other than the United States and all or a significant portion of the assets of the directors and officers and certain other persons named in this Annual Report and substantially all of our assets are located outside of the United States. As a result, it may not be possible or practicable to effect service of process within the United States upon such persons or to enforce against them or against us judgments obtained in U.S. courts predicated upon the civil liability provisions of the federal securities laws of the United States. Even if successful in bringing such an action, there is doubt as to whether Australian courts would enforce certain civil liabilities under U.S. securities laws in original actions or judgments of U.S. courts based upon these civil liability provisions. In addition, awards of punitive damages in actions brought in the United States or elsewhere may be unenforceable in Australia or elsewhere outside the United States. An award for monetary damages under U.S. securities laws would be considered punitive if it does not seek to compensate the claimant for loss or damage suffered and is intended to punish the defendant. The enforceability of any judgment in Australia will depend on the particular facts of the case as well as the laws and treaties in effect at the time. The United States and Australia do not currently have a treaty or statute providing for recognition and enforcement of the judgments of the other country (other than arbitration awards) in civil and commercial matters. As a result, our holders of our ADSs may have more difficulty in protecting their interests through actions against us, our management or our directors than would shareholders of a corporation incorporated in a jurisdiction in the United States.

In addition, as a company incorporated in Australia, the provisions of the Corporations Act regulate the circumstances in which shareholder derivative actions may be commenced, which may be different to the circumstances for companies incorporated in the United States.

As a U.S. publicly-traded company, and particularly if we cease to be an “emerging growth company” as defined in the JOBS Act, we continue to and will incur substantial legal, accounting and other expenses as a result of the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act. In addition, Sarbanes-Oxley Act, along with rules promulgated by the SEC, and Nasdaq, where our ADSs trade, have significant requirements on public companies, including many changes involving corporate governance. Management and other company personnel devote a substantial amount of time ensuring our compliance with these regulations. Accordingly, our legal, accounting and financial compliance expenses have significantly increased, and certain corporate actions have become more time-consuming and costly. For example, these regulations have made it more difficult to attract and retain qualified members of our board of directors and various corporate committees. Obtaining director and officer liability insurance is significantly more expensive as a public company.

69

The trading market for our ADSs are influenced by the research reports and opinions that securities or industry analysts publish about our business. Investors have numerous investment opportunities and may limit their investments to publicly traded companies that receive thorough research coverage. If no analysts cover us or if one or more analysts cease to cover us or fail to publish reports in a regular manner, we could lose visibility in the financial markets, which could cause a significant and prolonged decline in the trading price of our ADSs due to lack of investor awareness.

In the event that we do not obtain analyst coverage, or if one or more of the analysts downgrade our ADSs or comment negatively about our prospects or the prospects of other companies operating in our industry, the trading price of our ADSs could decline significantly. There is no guarantee that equity research organizations will elect to initiate or sustain research coverage of us, nor whether such research, if initiated, will be positive towards the trading price of our ADSs or our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Social media is increasingly being used to communicate about us and the diseases our products are designed to treat. Social media practices in the biopharmaceutical industry continue to evolve and regulations relating to such use are not always clear and create uncertainty and risk of noncompliance with regulations applicable to our business. For example, patients may use social media channels to comment on the effectiveness of a product or to report an alleged adverse event. When such disclosures occur, there is a risk that we fail to monitor and comply with applicable adverse event reporting obligations or we may not be able to defend ourselves or the public’s legitimate interests in the face of the political and market pressures generated by social media due to restrictions on what we may say about our products. There is also a risk of inappropriate disclosure of sensitive information or negative or inaccurate posts or comments about us on any social networking website. Further, there is a risk that unmerited or unsupported claims about our products may circulate on social media. If any of these events were to occur or we otherwise fail to comply with applicable regulations, we could incur liability, face overly restrictive regulatory actions, or incur other harm to us and our business, including damage to the reputation of our products.

Pursuant to Section 404 of Sarbanes-Oxley, our management will be required to report upon the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting beginning with the annual report for our fiscal year ending June 30, 2023. This assessment will need to include disclosure of any material weaknesses identified by our management in our internal control over financial reporting. A material weakness is a deficiency, or combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting that results in more than a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. The rules governing the standards that must be met for management to assess our internal control over financial reporting are complex and require significant documentation, testing and possible remediation. To comply with the requirements of being a reporting company under the Exchange Act, we will need to upgrade our information technology systems, implement additional financial and management controls, reporting systems and procedures and hire additional accounting and finance staff. If we or, if required, our auditor is unable to conclude that our internal control over financial reporting is effective, investors may lose confidence in our financial reporting and the trading price of our ADSs may decline.

Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act also generally requires an attestation from our independent registered public accounting firm on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. For as long as we remain an emerging growth company, we intend to take advantage of the exemption permitting us not to comply with the independent registered public accounting firm attestation requirement. When we lose our status as an “emerging growth company” and reach an accelerated filer

70

threshold, our independent registered public accounting firm will be required to attest to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting.

We cannot be certain as to when we will be able to implement the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Any failure to implement these requirements in a timely manner or to maintain internal control over our financial reporting could severely inhibit our ability to accurately report our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. If we are unable to conclude that our internal control over financial reporting is effective, or if our independent registered public accounting firm determines we have a material weakness or significant deficiency in our internal control over financial reporting once that firm begins its Section 404 reviews, we could lose investor confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports, the market price of our ADSs could decline, and we could be subject to sanctions or investigations by Nasdaq, the SEC or other regulatory authorities. Failure to remedy any material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting, or to implement or maintain other effective control systems required of public companies, could also restrict our future access to the capital markets.

The stock markets have from time to time experienced significant price and volume fluctuations that have affected the market prices for the shares of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies. These broad market fluctuations as well a broad range of other factors, including the realization of any of the risks described in this “Risk Factors” section of this Annual Report, may cause the market price of our ADSs to decline. In the past, securities class action litigation has often been brought against a company following a decline in the market price of its securities. This risk is especially relevant for us because biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies generally experience significant share price volatility. We may become involved in this type of litigation in the future. Litigation often is expensive and diverts management’s attention and resources, which could adversely affect our business. Any adverse determination in any such litigation or any amounts paid to settle any such actual or threatened litigation could require that we make significant payments.

71