natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
However, the Court of Justice (the ‘Court') has laid down several important principles as regards the interpretation of this term.
Međutim, Sud Europske unije („Sud”) propisao je nekoliko važnih načela o tumačenju tog izraza.
In Minimax (11/03/2003, C40/01, Minimax, EU:C:2003:145), the Court established the following principles:
U presudi u predmetu Minimax (11/03/2003, C40/01, Minimax, EU:C:2003:145), Sud je utvrdio sljedeća načela:
genuine use means actual use of the mark (paragraph 35);
stvarna uporaba znači stvarnu uporabu žiga (t. 35.);
genuine use must, therefore, be understood to denote use that is not merely token, serving solely to preserve the rights conferred by the mark (paragraph 36);
prema tome, stvarna uporaba treba označavati uporabu koja nije samo simbolična i koja ne služi isključivo za očuvanje prava koja proizlaze iz žiga (t. 36.);
genuine use must be consistent with the essential function of a trade mark, which is to guarantee the identity of the origin of goods or services to the consumer or end user by enabling the latter, without any possibility of confusion, to distinguish the product or service from others that have another origin (paragraph 36);
stvarna uporaba treba biti u skladu s osnovnom funkcijom žiga, a to je jamčiti potrošaču ili krajnjem korisniku podrijetlo proizvoda ili usluga, omogućujući potonjem da bez bilo kakve zablude razlikuje proizvod ili uslugu od drugih koji imaju drukčije podrijetlo (t. 36.);
genuine use entails use of the mark on the market for the goods or services protected by that mark and not just internal use by the undertaking concerned (paragraph 37);
stvarna uporaba podrazumijeva tržišnu uporabu žiga za proizvode ili usluge zaštićene tim žigom, a ne samo internu uporabu unutar poduzeća (t. 37.);
genuine use must relate to goods or services already marketed or about to be marketed and for which preparations by the undertaking to secure customers are under way, particularly in the form of advertising campaigns (paragraph 37);
stvarna uporaba treba se odnositi na proizvode ili usluge koji su već stavljeni na tržište ili će se staviti na tržište, i u pogledu kojih poduzeće već obavlja pripreme da bi ih učinilo dostupnima za potrošače, posebno u obliku reklamnih kampanja (t. 37.);
when assessing whether there has been genuine use, regard must be had to all the facts and circumstances relevant to establishing whether the commercial exploitation of the mark is real, in particular whether such use is viewed as warranted in the economic sector concerned to maintain or create a share in the market for the goods or services protected by the mark (paragraph 38);
pri procjeni stvarne uporabe treba uzeti u obzir sve činjenice i okolnosti relevantne za utvrđivanje stvarne komercijalne uporabe žiga, posebno smatra li se takva uporaba opravdanom u gospodarskom sektoru radi održavanja ili stvaranja tržišnog udjela za proizvode ili usluge zaštićene žigom (t. 38.);
the circumstances of the case may, therefore, include giving consideration, inter alia, to the nature of the goods or services at issue, the characteristics of the market concerned and the scale and frequency of use of the mark (paragraph 39);
prema tome, okolnosti slučaja mogu uključivati razmatranje, među ostalim, prirode predmetnih proizvoda ili usluga, obilježja predmetnog tržišta te opsega i učestalosti uporabe žiga (t. 39.);
use need not, therefore, always be quantitatively significant for it to be deemed genuine, as that depends on the characteristics of the goods or services concerned on the corresponding market (paragraph 39).
dakle, uporaba ne treba uvijek biti količinski značajna da bi se smatrala stvarnom zato što ona ovisi o obilježjima predmetnih proizvoda ili usluga na odgovarajućem tržištu (t. 39.).
In its order of 27/01/2004, C259/02, Laboratoire de la mer, EU:C:2004:50, the Court further elaborated the Minimax criteria as follows:
U rješenju od 27/01/2004, C259/02, Laboratoire de la mer, EU:C:2004:50, Sud je dodatno razradio kriterije iz predmeta Minimax kako slijedi:
the question whether use is sufficient to preserve or create market share for the goods or services concerned depends on several factors and on a case-by-case assessment.
pitanje je li uporaba dostatna za očuvanje ili stvaranje tržišnog udjela za predmetne proizvode ili usluge ovisi o nekoliko čimbenika i procjeni od slučaja do slučaja.
The characteristics of the goods and services, the frequency or regularity of the use of the mark, whether the mark is used for the purpose of marketing all the identical goods or services of the proprietor or merely some of them, or evidence that the proprietor is able to provide, are among the factors that may be taken into account (paragraph 22);
Neki od čimbenika koji se mogu uzeti u obzir uključuju obilježja proizvoda i usluga, učestalost ili redovitost uporabe žiga, pitanje upotrebljava li se žig u svrhu stavljanja na tržište svih istovjetnih proizvoda ili usluga nositelja ili samo nekih od njih, ili dokaze koje nositelj može podnijeti (t. 22.);
use of the mark by a single client that imports the goods for which the mark is registered can be sufficient to demonstrate that such use is genuine, if it appears that the import operation has a genuine commercial justification for the proprietor of the mark (paragraph 24);
kada jedan korisnik, koji uvozi proizvode za koje je žig registriran, rabi žig, a to može biti dostatno za dokazivanje stvarne uporabe ako se može zaključiti da je za nositelja žiga uvoz stvarno komercijalno opravdan (t. 24.);
a de minimis rule cannot be laid down (paragraph 25).
primjena pravila de minimis ne može se propisati (t. 25.).
Article 47 EUTMR requires proof of genuine use of the earlier mark.
Uredbe o žigu EU-a zahtijeva se dokaz o stvarnoj uporabi ranijeg žiga.
Genuine use of a trade mark cannot be proved by means of probabilities or suppositions, but must be demonstrated by solid and objective evidence of effective and sufficient use of the trade mark on the market concerned (18/01/2011, T382/08, Vogue, EU:T:2011:9, § 22).
Stvarna uporaba žiga ne može se dokazati vjerojatnostima ili pretpostavkama, nego se mora temeljiti na konkretnim i objektivnim dokazima koji dokazuju učinkovitu i dostatnu uporabu žiga na predmetnom tržištu (18/01/2011, T382/08, Vogue, EU:T:2011:9, § 22).
Moreover, the Office cannot determine ex officio the genuine use of earlier marks.
Uostalom, Ured po službenoj dužnosti ne može utvrditi stvarnu uporabu ranijih žigova.
Even proprietors of purportedly well-known marks must submit evidence to prove genuine use of the earlier mark(s).
Čak i nositelji navodno poznatih žigova trebaju podnijeti dokaze kako bi dokazali stvarnu uporabu ranijih žigova.
The Office does not necessarily require a high threshold of proof of genuine use.
Ured ne zahtijeva nužno visok prag za dokazivanje stvarne uporabe.
The Court has indicated that it is not possible to prescribe, in the abstract, what quantitative threshold should be chosen in order to determine whether use was genuine or not, and accordingly there can be no objective de minimis rule to establish a priori the level of use needed in order for it to be ‘genuine'.
Sud je ukazao na nemogućnost apstraktnog propisivanja količinskog praga koji treba doseći kako bi se utvrdilo je li riječ o stvarnoj uporabi, pa u skladu s time objektivno pravilo de minimis ne može primjenjivati za a priori utvrđivanje potrebne razine „stvarne” uporabe.
So, whilst a minimum extent of use must be shown, what exactly constitutes this minimum extent depends on the circumstances of each case.
Iako je potrebno dokazati najmanji opseg uporabe, treba imati na umu da ono što doista čini najmanji opseg zapravo ovisi o okolnostima svakog pojedinog slučaja.
The general rule is that, when it serves a real commercial purpose, even minimal use of the trade mark could be sufficient to establish genuine use, depending on the goods and services, and the relevant market (23/09/2009, T409/07, acopat, EU:T:2009:354, § 35 and case-law cited therein; 02/02/2012, T387/10, Arantax, EU:T:2012:51, § 42).
Ovisno o proizvodima i uslugama i relevantnom tržištu, opće je pravilo da čak i minimalna uporaba žiga može biti dovoljna za utvrđivanje stvarne uporabe kada služi stvarnoj gospodarskoj svrsi (23/09/2009, T409/07, acopat, EU:T:2009:354, § 35 i navedena sudska praksa; 02/02/2012, T387/10, Arantax, EU:T:2012:51, § 42).
In other words, it is sufficient if the evidence of use proves that the trade mark owner has seriously tried to acquire or maintain a commercial position in the relevant market as opposed to having solely used the mark with the intention of preserving the rights conferred by the mark (token use).
Drugim riječima, uporaba je dostatna kada se na temelju podnesenih dokaza o uporabi može dokazati da je nositelj žiga ozbiljno nastojao steći ili održati poslovni položaj na relevantnom tržištu, te da žig ne služi isključivo za očuvanje prava koja proizlaze iz žiga (simbolična uporaba).
For instance, in some cases, relatively few sales might be sufficient to conclude that the use is not merely token, in particular with regard to expensive goods (04/09/2007, R 35/20072, DINKY, § 22).
Na primjer, u nekim je okolnostima dostatan relativno mali broj prodaja za izvođenje zaključka da uporaba nije samo simbolična, posebno u pogledu skupih proizvoda (04/09/2007, R 35/20072, DINKY, § 22).
Nonetheless, even if inter alia a very modest amount of use can suffice in certain circumstances, proprietors should adduce comprehensive evidence of use.
Ipak, unatoč tome što u određenim okolnostima, među ostalim, vrlo skromna uporaba može biti dostatna, nositelji trebaju predočiti sveobuhvatne dokaze o uporabi.
These requirements for proof of use are cumulative (05/10/2010, T92/09, STRATEGI / Stratégies, EU:T:2010:424, § 43).
Ti su uvjeti za dokazivanje uporabe kumulativni (05/10/2010, T92/09, STRATEGI / Stratégies, EU:T:2010:424, § 43).
This means that the opponent is obliged not only to indicate but also to prove each of these requirements.
To znači da je podnositelj prigovora obvezan ne samo ukazati na svaki od navedenih uvjeta, već ih treba i dokazati.
However, the sufficiency of the indication and proof as to the place, time, extent and nature of use has to be considered in view of the entirety of the evidence submitted.
Međutim, dostatnost podataka i dokaza o mjestu, vremenu, opsegu i prirodi uporabe treba razmotriti s obzirom na cjelokupnost podnesenih dokaza.
A separate assessment of the various relevant factors, each considered in isolation, is not suitable (17/02/2011, T324/09, Friboi, EU:T:2011:47, § 31).
Odvojena procjena različitih čimbenika, od kojih se svaki razmatra zasebno, neprimjerena je (17/02/2011, T324/09, Friboi, EU:T:2011:47, § 31).
Thus, the Office evaluates the evidence submitted in an overall assessment.
Prema tome, Ured procjenjuje podnesene dokaze u okviru cjelokupne procjene.
All the circumstances of the specific case have to be taken into account and all the materials submitted must be assessed in conjunction with each other.
U obzir treba uzeti sve okolnosti konkretnog slučaja, pri čemu sve podnesene materijale treba procijeniti zajedno s ostalim materijalima.
Therefore, although pieces of evidence may be insufficient by themselves to prove the use of an earlier trade mark, they may contribute to proving use in combination with other documentation and information.
Stoga, iako dijelovi dokaza sami po sebi mogu biti nedostatni za dokazivanje uporabe ranijeg žiga, oni mogu pridonijeti dokazivanju uporabe u kombinaciji s drugom dokumentacijom i informacijama.
Evidence of use may be of an indirect/circumstantial nature, such as evidence about the share in the relevant market, the importing of the relevant goods, the supply of the necessary raw materials or packaging to the owner of the mark, or the expiry date of the relevant goods.
Dokaz o uporabi može biti neizravne/sporedne prirode, kao što su dokazi o udjelu na relevantnom tržištu, uvoz relevantnih proizvoda, opskrba nositelja žiga potrebnim sirovinama ili ambalažom te rok valjanosti relevantnih proizvoda.
Such indirect evidence can play a decisive role in the overall assessment of the evidence submitted.
Takvi neizravni dokazi mogu imati presudnu ulogu u cjelokupnoj procjeni podnesenih dokaza.
Its probative value has to be carefully assessed.
Njihovu dokaznu vrijednost treba pažljivo procijeniti.
For instance, the judgment of 08/07/2010, T30/09, Peerstorm, EU:T:2010:298, § 42 et seq. found that catalogues in themselves could - under certain circumstances - be conclusive evidence of sufficient extent of use.
Na primjer, u presudi od 08/07/2010, T30/09, Peerstorm, EU:T:2010:298, § 42 et seq. utvrđeno je da katalozi sami po sebi u određenim okolnostima mogu biti uvjerljiv dokaz o dostatnom opsegu uporabe.
It is necessary to take into account the specific kind of the goods and services involved when assessing the probative value of the evidence submitted.
Prilikom procjenjivanja dokazne vrijednosti podnesenih dokaza u obzir treba uzeti specifičnu vrstu predmetnih proizvoda i usluga.
For example, it may be common in a particular market sector for the samples of the goods and services themselves not to bear indications of the place, time, extent and nature of use.
Na primjer, u određenom tržišnom sektoru može biti uobičajeno da uzorci proizvoda i usluga nemaju oznaku mjesta, vremena, opsega i prirode uporabe.
In these cases it is obviously inappropriate to disregard such evidence of use if indications in this respect can be found in the other evidence submitted.
U takvim okolnostima očito nije primjereno zanemariti takve dokaze o uporabi ako takve oznake možemo pronaći u ostalim podnesenim dokazima.
Material submitted without any indication of date of use may, in the context of an overall assessment, still be relevant and taken into consideration in conjunction with other pieces of evidence that are dated (17/02/2011, T324/09, Friboi, EU:T:2011:47, § 33).
Materijal koji je podnesen bez ikakvih oznaka o datumu uporabe može, u kontekstu cjelokupne procjene, i dalje biti relevantan i može se uzeti u obzir u kombinaciji s ostalim dokazima koji posjeduju takvu oznaku (17/02/2011, T324/09, Friboi, EU:T:2011:47, § 33).
This is the case in particular if it is common in a particular market sector for the samples of the goods and services themselves not to bear indications of time (05/09/2001, R 608/20004, PALAZZO / HELADERIA PALAZZO, § 16, noting that ice-cream menus are rarely dated).
To je osobito slučaj ako je za uzorke proizvoda i usluga u određenom tržišnom sektoru uobičajeno da nemaju oznaku o vremenu (05/09/2001, R 608/20004, PALAZZO / HELADERIA PALAZZO, § 16, u kojoj je napomenuto da jelovnici sa sladoledom rijetko sadržavaju oznaku o vremenu).
For implementation of the abovementioned general principles in practice, see the examples in paragraph 3.7.5 below.
Pojedinosti o praktičnoj provedbi prethodno navedenih općih načela pogledajte u primjerima u odlomku 3.7.5.
The term ‘nature of use' refers to:
Izraz „priroda uporabe” odnosi se na:
use of the mark as registered or of a variation thereof in accordance with Article 18(1)(a) EUTMR (paragraph 2.7 below); and
uporabu žiga u obliku u kojem je registriran ili uz manja odstupanja od tog oblika u skladu s člankom 18. stavkom 1. točkom (a) Uredbe o žigu EU-a (odlomak 2.7.
Article 18 and Article 47(2) EUTMR require proof of genuine use in connection with the goods or services for which the trade mark is registered and which the opponent cites as justification for its opposition.
Uredbe o žigu EU-a zahtijevaju se dokazi o stvarnoj uporabi u pogledu proizvoda ili usluga za koje je žig registriran i koje podnositelj prigovora navodi kao opravdanje za svoj prigovor.
Hence, the opponent has to show that the mark has been used as a trade mark on the market.
Prema tome podnositelj prigovora treba dokazati da je žig na tržištu upotrebljavao u svojstvu žiga.
As clearly indicated in Article 10(4) EUTMDR, it is not necessary for the mark to be affixed to the goods themselves (12/12/2014, T105/13 TrinkFix, EU:T:2014:1070, § 2838).
Delegirane uredbe o žigu EU-a, nije potrebno da žig bude istaknut na samom proizvodu (12/12/2014, T105/13 TrinkFix, EU:T:2014:1070, § 2838).
A representation of the mark on packaging, catalogues, advertising material or invoices relating to the goods and services in question constitutes direct evidence that the mark has been put to genuine use (see also paragraph 2.3.3.2 below).
Prikaz žiga na ambalaži, katalozima, promidžbenom materijalu ili računima koji se odnose na predmetne proizvode i usluge čini izravan dokaz stvarne uporabe žiga (pogledajte i odlomak 2.3.3.2.
not for purely illustrative purposes or on purely promotional goods or services,
ne isključivo u ilustrativne svrhe ili isključivo na promotivnim proizvodima ili uslugama;
in accordance with its essential function, which is to guarantee the identity of the origin of the goods or services for which it is registered (11/03/2003, C40/01, Minimax, EU:C:2003:145, § 43).
u skladu s osnovnom funkcijom žiga, a to je jamčiti podrijetlo proizvoda ili usluga za koje je registriran (11/03/2003, C40/01, Minimax, EU:C:2003:145, § 43).
Therefore, by way of example, the following are not suitable for supporting genuine use of a trade mark.
Prema tome, sljedeći primjeri nisu primjereni za dokazivanje stvarne uporabe žiga.
Use as a certification mark.
Uporaba u svojstvu certifikacijskog žiga.
Certification marks can be obtained in some jurisdictions for compliance with defined standards.
Certifikacijski žigovi mogu se dobiti u nekim nadležnostima za usklađenost s utvrđenim standardima.
The holder of a certification mark is not the authorised user, producer or provider of the certified goods or services, but rather the certifier, which exercises legitimate control over use of the certification mark.
Nositelj certifikacijskog žiga nije ovlašteni korisnik, proizvođač ili pružatelj certificiranih proizvoda ili usluga, nego certifikator koji ima legitiman nadzor nad uporabom certifikacijskog žiga.
Certification marks may be used together with the individual trade mark of the producer of the certified goods or of the provider of the certified services.
Certifikacijski žigovi mogu se upotrebljavati zajedno s pojedinačnim žigovima proizvođača certificiranih proizvoda ili pružatelja certificiranih usluga.
The essential function of a certification mark is different from the essential function of an individual trade mark: while the latter primarily serves to identify the origin of goods and services, the former serves to certify that the goods or services meet certain established standards and possess particular characteristics.
Osnovna funkcija certifikacijskih žigova razlikuje se od osnovne funkcije pojedinačnih žigova: dok potonji u prvom redu služe za utvrđivanje podrijetla proizvoda i usluga, prvi služe za potvrđivanje da proizvodi ili usluge ispunjavaju određene utvrđene standarde i posjeduju određena obilježja.
This is in contrast with the main function of an individual trade mark, namely to serve as an indicator of commercial origin.
To je u suprotnosti s glavnom funkcijom pojedinačnog žiga, odnosno da se upotrebljava kao oznaka komercijalnog podrijetla.
When a PGI/PDO has been registered as an individual mark (and not, for example, as a collective mark), the opponent has to submit proof of use as an individual mark.
Ako je oznaka zemljopisnog podrijetla / zaštićenih oznaka izvornosti registrirana kao pojedinačni žig (a ne, na primjer, kao zajednički žig), podnositelj prigovora mora podnijeti dokaz o uporabi u svojstvu pojedinačnog žiga.
Evidence of use as a PGI/PDO (e.g. general statements of Regulatory Councils) cannot serve for proving use as an individual mark.
Dokaz o uporabi u svojstvu oznake zemljopisnog podrijetla / zaštićene oznake izvornosti (npr. opći izvještaji regulatornih vijeća) ne može se prihvatiti kao dokaz o uporabi u svojstvu pojedinačnog žiga.
Depending on the circumstances, the following situations may be suitable for supporting genuine use of the registered trade mark.
Ovisno o okolnostima, sljedećim primjerima mogla bi se na odgovarajući način dokazati stvarna uporaba registriranog žiga.
That is because use of the sign can serve more than one purpose at the same time.
To je zato što uporaba znaka može istodobno imati više od jedne svrhe.
Consequently, the following uses can also be use of the sign as a trade mark.
Slijedom toga, sljedeće se vrste uporabe također mogu smatrati uporabom znaka u svojstvu žiga.
However, the purpose for which a sign is used needs to be assessed individually.
Međutim, svrhu u koju se znak upotrebljava potrebno je procijeniti pojedinačno.
Use of a sign as a business, company or trade name can be regarded as trade mark use provided that the relevant goods or services themselves are identified and offered on the market under this sign (13/04/2011, T209/09, Alder Capital, EU:T:2011:169, § 5556).
Uporaba znaka kao poslovnog naziva, naziva poduzeća ili trgovačkog naziva može se smatrati uporabom u svojstvu žiga ako se relevantni proizvodi ili usluge mogu prepoznati pod tim znakom ili ako se na tržištu nude pod njime (13/04/2011, T209/09, Alder Capital, EU:T:2011:169, § 5556).
In general, this is not the case when the business name is merely used as a shop sign (except when proving use for retail services), or appears on the back of a catalogue or as an incidental indication on a label (18/01/2011, T382/08, Vogue, EU:T:2011:9, § 47).
To načelno nije slučaj ako se poslovni naziv upotrebljava samo kao znak trgovine (osim kod dokazivanja uporabe za maloprodajne usluge) ili ako se nalazi na poleđini kataloga ili kao usputna naznaka na etiketi (18/01/2011, T382/08, Vogue, EU:T:2011:9, § 47).
In principle, use of the sign as a company name or trade name, is not, of itself, intended to distinguish goods or services.
Svrha uporabe znaka kao naziva poduzeća ili trgovačkog naziva sama po sebi načelno nije razlikovanje proizvoda i usluga.
The purpose of a company name is to identify a company, whereas the purpose of a trade name or a shop name is to designate a business that is being run.
Svrha naziva poduzeća jest omogućiti prepoznavanje poduzeća, dok je svrha trgovačkog naziva označiti posao koji se obavlja.
Accordingly, where use of a company name, trade name or shop name is limited to identifying a company or designating a business that is being run, such use cannot be considered as being ‘in relation to goods or services' (11/09/2007, C17/06, Céline, EU:C:2007:497, § 21; 13/05/2009, T183/08, Jello Schuhpark II, EU:T:2009:156, § 3132).
Prema tome, kada je uporaba naziva poduzeća ili trgovačkog naziva ograničena na prepoznavanje poduzeća ili označavanje posla koji se obavlja, takva uporaba ne može se smatrati „uporabom u odnosu na proizvode ili usluge” (11/09/2007, C17/06, Céline, EU:C:2007:497, § 21; 13/05/2009, T183/08, Jello Schuhpark II, EU:T:2009:156, § 3132).
Use of a business, company or trade name can be regarded as use ‘in relation to goods' where:
Uporaba naziva poduzeća / trgovačkog naziva može se smatrati uporabom „u odnosu na proizvode” ako:
(a) a party affixes the sign constituting its company name, trade name or shop name to the goods or;
strana istakne na proizvodu znak koji predstavlja naziv njezina poduzeća ili trgovački naziv;
(b) even though the sign is not affixed, the party uses the sign in such a way that a link is established between the company, trade or shop name and the goods or services (11/09/2007, C17/06, Céline, EU:C:2007:497, § 2123).
ta strana upotrebljava predmetni znak, iako ga nije istaknula na proizvodu, na način da njime uspostavlja vezu između naziva poduzeća ili trgovačkog naziva i proizvoda ili usluga (11/09/2007, C17/06, Céline, EU:C:2007:497, § 2123).
Provided that either of these two conditions is met, the fact that a word element is used as the company's trade name does not preclude its use as a mark to designate goods or services (30/11/2009, T353/07, Coloris, EU:T:2009:475, § 38).
Ako je ispunjen bilo koji od ta dva uvjeta, činjenica da se verbalni element upotrebljava kao trgovački naziv poduzeća ne isključuje njegovu uporabu u svojstvu žiga za označavanje proizvoda ili usluga (30/11/2009, T353/07, Coloris, EU:T:2009:475, § 38).