natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
As the Court held in para. 30 of Leno Merken, its judgment of 19/12/2012, C149/11, Onel / Omel, EU:C:2012:816, ‘the territorial scope of the use is only one of several factors to be taken into account in the determination of whether that use is genuine or not'.
Kao što je Sud utvrdio u t. 30. u predmetu „Leno Merken”, presuda od 19/12/2012, C149/11, Onel / Omel, EU:C:2012:816, „teritorijalni opseg uporabe samo je jedan od nekoliko čimbenika koje treba uzeti u obzir u utvrđivanju je li uporaba stvarna ili ne”.
The Court further indicated that use of the mark in non-EU territories cannot be taken into account (para. 38).
Sud je nadalje napomenuo da se uporaba žiga na područjima izvan Europske unije ne može uzeti u obzir (t. 38.).
In view of the globalisation of trade, an indication of the registered seat of the owner of the mark may not be regarded as sufficient indication that the use has taken place in that particular country.
S obzirom na globalizaciju trgovine, oznaka sjedišta nositelja žiga ne može se smatrati dostatnim pokazateljem o izvršenoj uporabi u određenoj zemlji.
Even though Article 18(1)(b) EUTMR stipulates that the affixing of the trade mark to goods or to the packaging thereof in the European Union solely for export purposes is considered as use of the mark, mere indication of the opponent's seat as such does not constitute evidence of such acts.
Iako se člankom 18. stavkom 1. točkom (b) Uredbe o žigu EU-a propisuje da se isticanje žiga na proizvodima ili njihovoj ambalaži u Europskoj uniji isključivo za potrebe izvoza smatra uporabom žiga, sama oznaka sjedišta podnositelja prigovora kao takvog ne smatra se dokazom takvih aktivnosti.
On the other hand, the fact that clients that have their seats outside the relevant territory are listed in the documents for proving use of the earlier mark is in itself not sufficient to rule out that services (e.g. promotion services) may actually have been rendered in the relevant territory for the benefit of these companies located in other territories (09/06/2010, R 952/20091, GLOBAL (fig.) / GLOBAL TABACOS (fig.), § 16).
S druge strane, činjenica da su klijenti sa sjedištem izvan predmetnog područja navedeni u dokumentima za dokazivanje uporabe ranijeg žiga sama je po sebi nedostatna za isključivanje mogućnosti da su usluge (npr. promotivne usluge) možda pružene na predmetnom području za dobrobit tih poduzeća koja se nalaze na drugim područjima (09/06/2010, R 952/20091, GLOBAL (fig.) / GLOBAL TABACOS (fig.), § 16).
2.4.2 EUTMs: use in the European Union
Žigovi EU-a: uporaba u Europskoj uniji
In territorial terms and in view of the unitary character of the EUTM, the appropriate approach is not that of political boundaries but of market(s).
U teritorijalnom smislu i u pogledu jedinstvenog karaktera žiga EU-a, odgovarajući pristup ne odnosi se na političke granice već na tržišta.
Moreover, one of the aims pursued by the EUTM system is to be open to businesses of all kinds and sizes.
Uostalom, jedan je od ciljeva sustava žiga EU-a otvorenost za poduzeća svih vrsta i veličina.
Therefore, the size of an undertaking is not a relevant factor for establishing genuine use.
Prema tome, veličina poduzeća nije relevantan čimbenik u utvrđivanju stvarne uporabe.
As the Court indicated in Leno Merken, it is impossible to determine a priori and in the abstract what territorial scope should be applied in order to determine whether the use of the mark is genuine or not (para. 55).
Kako je Sud naveo u predmetu „Leno Merken”, nemoguće je unaprijed i apstraktno utvrditi koji teritorijalni opseg treba primijeniti za utvrđivanje je li uporaba žiga bila stvarna ili ne (t. 55.).
All the relevant facts and circumstances must be taken into account, including the characteristics of the market concerned, the nature of the goods or services protected by the trade mark and the territorial extent and scale of the use as well as its frequency and regularity (para. 58).
U obzir treba uzeti sve relevantne činjenice i okolnosti, uključujući i obilježja predmetnog tržišta, narav proizvoda ili usluga zaštićenih žigom i teritorijalni opseg i razmjer uporabe te njezinu učestalost i redovitost (t. 58.).
Use of an EUTM in the UK (15/07/2015, T398/13, TVR ITALIA (fig.) / TVR et al., EU:T:2015:503, § 57) or even in London and its immediate surroundings may be geographically sufficient (30/01/2015, T278/13, now, EU:T:2015:57).
Uporaba žiga EU-a u Ujedinjenoj Kraljevini (15/07/2015, T398/13, TVR ITALIA (fig.) / TVR et al., EU:T:2015:503, § 57) ili čak samo u Londonu i njegovoj okolici može biti dostatna u zemljopisnom smislu (30/01/2015, T278/13, sada, EU:T:2015:57).
The Board of Appeal decision of 07/03/2013, R 234/20122, now (fig.) (confirmed 30/01/2015, T278/13, now, EU:T:2015:57), considered the use of an EUTM for wireless broadband services in Class 42 in the geographical area comprising London and the Thames Valley sufficient to constitute genuine use in the United Kingdom and also in the European Union, taking into account the territorial extent [London being ‘the largest city in the United Kingdom and the largest urban zone in the European Union', having ‘a metropolitan area … with an estimated total population of between 12 million and 14 million people', being ‘the world's leading financial centre along with New York', ‘a leading centre of arts, science, tourism and media and information technology', and having a profile on the European commercial scene ‘disproportionately high in respect to the services in question' (R 234/20122, para. 47), and the Thames Valley being ‘200 miles long and 30 miles wide' and including ‘populous towns and cities of significant economic activity' (R 234/20122, para. 4546)], the scale, frequency and regularity of use and the characteristics of the market concerned (R 234/20122, para. 52).
U odluci žalbenog vijeća od 07/03/2013, R 234/20122, sada (fig.) (potvrđeno 30/01/2015, T278/13, sada, EU:T:2015:57, sada EU:T:2015:57) uporaba žiga EU-a za bežične širokopojasne usluge iz razreda 42. na zemljopisnom području koje obuhvaća London i dolinu Temze procijenjena je dostatnom kako bi se mogla smatrati stvarnom uporabom u Ujedinjenoj Kraljevini i u Europskoj uniji, uzimajući u obzir teritorijalni opseg uporabe [London je „najveći grad u Ujedinjenoj Kraljevini i najveća urbana zona u Europskoj uniji”, „procijenjeni ukupni broj stanovnika njegovog šireg gradskog područja iznosi od 12 do 14 milijuna”, a „uz New York vodeće je svjetsko financijsko središte”, te „vodeće središte u pogledu umjetnosti, znanosti, turizma te medija i informacijske tehnologije”, čiji je profil na europskom tržištu „nerazmjerno visoko izražen u odnosu na predmetne usluge” (R 234/20122, t. 47.), a dolina Temze proteže se „200 milja u dužinu i 30 milja u širinu” te uključuje „naseljena mjesta i gradove značajne gospodarske aktivnosti” (R 234/20122, para. 4546)], razmjer uporabe, njezinu učestalost i redovitost te obilježja predmetnog tržišta (R 234/20122, para. 52).
The Office must determine on a case-by-case basis whether the various indications and evidence can be combined for the purpose of assessing the genuine character of use, the geographical dimension of which is only one of the aspects to be considered.
Ured treba u svakom pojedinom slučaju odrediti je li moguće kombinirati razne indicije i dokaze u svrhu procjene stvarnog karaktera uporabe, pri čemu je zemljopisna dimenzija samo jedan od čimbenika koji treba uzeti u obzir.
2.4.3 National marks: use in the relevant Member State
Nacionalni žigovi: uporaba u relevantnoj državi članici
If the earlier mark is a national mark with effect in one of the Member States of the European Union, the mark must have been genuinely used in the country where it is protected (Article 47(3) EUTMR).
Ako je raniji žig nacionalni žig s učinkom u jednoj od država članica Europske unije, žig mora biti u stvarnoj uporabi u zemlji u kojoj je zaštićen (članak 47. stavak 3.
If the earlier mark is an international mark or a Benelux mark, the mark must have been genuinely used in the territory of the relevant countries of the international registration or in Benelux, respectively.
Ako je raniji žig međunarodni žig ili žig iz Beneluksa, mora se dokazati stvarna uporaba na području relevantnih zemalja, kada je riječ o međunarodnoj registraciji, odnosno u Beneluksu.
2.4.4 Use in the import and export trade
Uporaba u uvoznom i izvoznom prometu
According to Article 18(1)(b) EUTMR, the affixing of the European Union trade mark to goods or to the packaging thereof in the European Union solely for export purposes also constitutes use within the meaning of Article 18(1) EUTMR.
U skladu s člankom 18. stavkom 1. točkom (b) Uredbe o žigu EU-a, isticanje žiga EU-a na proizvodima ili njihovoj ambalaži u Uniji isključivo za potrebe izvoza također se smatra uporabom u smislu članka 18. stavka 1.
Evidence relating only to the import of the goods in the relevant area may, depending on the circumstances of the case, suffice as proof of use in this area (see by analogy 09/07/2010, T430/08, Grain Millers, EU:T:2010:304, § 33, 40 et seq. regarding proof of use in the course of trade of a sign, on the basis of imports from Romania to Germany).
Dokaz koji se odnosi samo na uvoz proizvoda u predmetno područje može, ovisno o okolnostima slučaja, biti dostatan dokaz o uporabi u tom području (analogijom pogledajte 09/07/2010, T430/08, Grain Millers, EU:T:2010:304, § 33, 40 et seq. u pogledu dokaza o uporabi znaka u trgovačkom prometu temeljem uvoza iz Rumunjske u Njemačku).
The Court has held that transit, which consists in transporting goods lawfully manufactured in a Member State to a non-member country by passing through one or more Member States, does not involve any marketing of the goods in question and is therefore not liable to infringe the specific subject matter of the trade mark (regarding the transit through France of goods originating in Spain and destined for Poland, see judgments of 23/10/2003, C115/02, Rioglass and Transremar, EU:C:2003:587, § 27; 09/11/2006, C281/05, Diesel, EU:C:2006:709, § 19).
Sud je presudio da provoz, koji se sastoji u prijevozu proizvoda koji su zakonito proizvedeni u državi članici do države koja nije članica EU-a prolaskom kroz jednu ili više država članica, ne podrazumijeva nikakvo stavljanje na tržište predmetnih proizvoda pa prema tome ne podliježe povredi specifičnog predmeta žiga (u pogledu provoza proizvoda podrijetlom iz Španjolske preko Francuske u Poljsku, pogledajte presudu od 23/10/2003, C115/02, Rioglass and Transremar, EU:C:2003:587, § 27; 09/11/2006, C281/05, Diesel, EU:C:2006:709, § 1).
Therefore, mere transit through a Member State cannot constitute genuine use of the earlier mark in that territory (09/12/2015, T354/14, ZuMEX (fig.) / JUMEX, EU:T:2015:947, § 62).
Prema tome, sam provoz kroz državu članicu ne može se smatrati stvarnom uporabom ranijeg žiga na tom području (09/12/2015, T354/14, ZuMEX (fig.) / JUMEX, EU:T:2015:947, § 62).
2.5 Time of use
Vrijeme uporabe
2.5.1 Oppositions filed on or after 23/03/2016
Prigovori podneseni 23. 3. 2016. ili kasnije
If the earlier mark is subject to the use requirement at all (registered for not less than 5 years), the actual period for which use must be shown can simply be computed backwards from the filing or, if the contested EUTM application has a priority date, from the priority date of the contested EUTM application.
Ako raniji žig podliježe uvjetu uporabe (registriran najmanje pet godina), stvarno razdoblje za koje se mora dokazati uporaba može se jednostavno izračunati unatrag od datuma prijave ili, ako osporavana prijava žiga EU-a ima datum prvenstva, od datuma prvenstva osporavane prijave žiga EU-a.
For example, if the contested EUTM application was filed on 15/06/2016, or if this date was the priority date of the contested EUTM application, the opponent would have to prove genuine use of its mark within the period from 15/06/2011 to 14/06/2016.
Na primjer, ako je osporavana prijava žiga EU-a podnesena 15. 6. 2016. ili ako je taj datum bio datum prvenstva osporavane prijave žiga EU-a, podnositelj prigovora morao bi dokazati stvarnu uporabu svojeg žiga u razdoblju od 15. 6. 2011. do 14. 6. 2016.
If the contested mark is an international registration designating the European Union, the actual period for which use must be proven can simply be computed backwards from the date of registration (INID code 151) or the date of priority (INID code 300), or, as the case may be, the date of subsequent designation of the European Union (INID code 891).
Ako je osporavani žig međunarodna registracija u kojoj je naznačena Europska unija, stvarno razdoblje za koje se mora dokazati uporaba može se jednostavno izračunati unatrag od datuma registracije (oznaka 151 INID) ili datuma prvenstva (oznaka 300 INID) ili, ovisno o slučaju, datuma naknadne naznake Europske unije (oznaka 891 INID).
For example, if the contested international registration were registered, or if the European Union were subsequently designated, on 15/06/2016, the opponent would have to prove genuine use of its mark within the period from 15/06/2011 to 14/06/2016.
Na primjer, ako je osporavana međunarodna registracija registrirana, ili je naznaka Europske unije naknadno dodana, dana 15. 6. 2016. podnositelj prigovora morao bi dokazati stvarnu uporabu svojeg žiga u razdoblju od 15. 6. 2011. do 14. 6. 2016.
Evidence referring to use made outside the relevant time frame is in general immaterial, unless it constitutes conclusive indirect proof that the mark must have also been put to genuine use during the relevant period.
Dokazi koji se odnose na uporabu izvan relevantnog vremenskog okvira ne uzimaju se u obzir, osim ako ne predstavljaju odlučujući neizravni dokaz da je žig bio u stvarnoj uporabi i tijekom relevantnog razdoblja.
The Court held in this context that circumstances subsequent to the relevant point of time may make it possible to confirm or better assess the extent to which the trade mark was used during the relevant period and the real intentions of the proprietor during that time (27/01/2004, C259/02, Laboratoire de la mer, EU:C:2004:50, § 31).
Sud je u tom kontekstu presudio da okolnosti koje su uslijedile nakon relevantnog trenutka mogu omogućiti potvrđivanje ili bolju procjenu opsega uporabe žiga tijekom relevantnog razdoblja i stvarne namjere nositelja tijekom tog vremena (27/01/2004, C259/02, Laboratoire de la mer, EU:C:2004:50, § 31).
Where a mark has not been genuinely used for more than 5 years before the filing or priority date of the contested EUTM application, the fact that there may be remaining goodwill or knowledge of the mark in the mind of the trade or customers does not ‘save' the mark.
Ako žig nije bio u stvarnoj uporabi dulje od pet godina prije datuma prijave ili datuma prvenstva osporavane prijave žiga EU-a, neće ga „spasiti” činjenica da postoji dobra volja potrošača ili poznavanje žiga u trgovačkom prometu ili u očima potrošača.
The use need not have been made throughout the period of 5 years, but rather within the 5 years.
Uporaba nije obvezna tijekom cijelog razdoblja od pet godina, već unutar tih pet godina.
The provisions on the use requirement do not require continuous use (16/12/2008, T86/07, Deitech, EU:T:2008:577, § 52).
Odredbama o uvjetu uporabe ne zahtijeva se neprekidna uporaba (16/12/2008, T86/07, Deitech, EU:T:2008:577, § 52).
2.5.2 Oppositions filed before 23/03/2016
Prigovori podneseni prije 23. 3. 2016.
Before the entry into force of the Amending Regulation, the 5-year period was computed backwards from the date of publication of the contested EUTM application.
Prije stupanja na snagu Uredbe o izmjeni petogodišnje razdoblje računalo se unatrag od datuma objave osporavane prijave žiga EU-a.
For example, if the contested international registration or its subsequent designation of the European Union was published on 15/06/2009, the opponent would have to prove genuine use of its mark within the period from 15/12/2004 to 14/12/2009.
Na primjer, ako su osporavana međunarodna registracija ili njezina naknadna naznaka Europske unije objavljene 15. 6. 2009., podnositelj prigovora morao bi dokazati stvarnu uporabu žiga u razdoblju od 15. 12. 2004. do 14. 12. 2009.
2.6 Extent of use
Opseg uporabe
2.6.1 Criteria
Kriteriji
In this regard, it has to be evaluated whether, in view of the market situation in the particular industry or trade concerned, it can be deduced from the material submitted that the owner has seriously tried to acquire a commercial position in the relevant market.
U tom smislu, treba procijeniti može li se, s obzirom na tržišnu situaciju u određenom industrijskom ili trgovačkom sektoru, na osnovi podnesenog materijala zaključiti, da je nositelj ozbiljno pokušao steći komercijalni položaj na relevantnom tržištu.
The trade mark has to be used for 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 (11/03/2003, C40/01, Minimax, EU:C:2003:145, § 37).
Žig treba biti u uporabi za proizvode ili usluge koji su već stavljeni na tržište ili će se staviti na tržište, i u pogledu kojih poduzeće već obavlja pripreme kako bi ih učinilo dostupnima za potrošače, posebno u obliku reklamnih kampanja (11/03/2003, C40/01, Minimax, EU:C:2003:145, § 37).
This does not mean that the opponent has to reveal the total volume of sales or turnover figures.
To ne znači da podnositelj prijave treba otkriti ukupni opseg prodaje ili promet u brojkama.
Concerning the extent of use made of the earlier mark, account must be taken, in particular, of the commercial volume of all the acts of use on the one hand and the duration of the period in which those acts of use occurred, as well as the frequency of those acts, on the other (08/07/2004, T334/01, Hipoviton, EU:T:2004:223, § 35).
U pogledu opsega uporabe ranijeg žiga, s jedne strane posebno treba voditi računa o komercijalnom opsegu svih radnji u pogledu uporabe i trajanju razdoblja u kojemu se ta uporaba dogodila, a s druge strane o učestalosti tih radnji (08/07/2004, T334/01, Hipoviton, EU:T:2004:223, § 35).
The assessment entails a degree of interdependence between the factors taken into account.
Procjena podrazumijeva određenu razinu međuovisnosti između čimbenika koji su uzeti u obzir.
Thus, the fact that commercial volume achieved under the mark was not high may be offset by the fact that use of the mark was extensive or very regular, and vice versa (08/07/2004, T203/02, Vitafruit, EU:T:2004:225, § 42).
Prema tome, činjenica da komercijalni opseg postignut na temelju žiga nije bio velik može se neutralizirati činjenicom da je uporaba žiga bila opsežna i vrlo redovita, i obrnuto (08/07/2004, T203/02, Vitafruit, EU:T:2004:225, § 42).
Under certain circumstances, even circumstantial evidence such as catalogues featuring the trade mark, despite not providing direct information on the quantity of goods actually sold, can be sufficient by themselves to prove the extent of use in an overall assessment (15/07/2015, T398/13 TVR ITALIA (fig.) / TVR et al., EU:T:2015:503, § 57-58; 08/07/2010, T30/09, Peerstorm, EU:T:2010:298, § 42 et seq.).
U određenim okolnostima čak i posredni dokazi kao što su katalozi u kojima se prikazuje žig, unatoč tome što katalozi ne pružaju izravne informacije o količini stvarno prodanih proizvoda, mogu sami po sebi biti dostatni za dokazivanje opsega uporabe u cjelokupnoj procjeni (15/07/2015, T398/13 TVR ITALIA (fig.) / TVR et al., EU:T:2015:503, § 57-58; 08/07/2010, T30/09, Peerstorm, EU:T:2010:298, § 42 et seq.).
Use does not have to be made during a minimum period of time to qualify as ‘genuine'.
Da bi se smatrala „stvarnom”, uporaba ne mora nastupiti tijekom određenog najmanjeg razdoblja.
In particular, use does not have to be continuous throughout the relevant period of 5 years.
Konkretno, uporaba ne mora biti neprekidna tijekom relevantnog razdoblja od pet godina.
It is sufficient if use was made at the very beginning or end of the period, provided the use was genuine (16/12/2008, T86/07, Deitech, EU:T:2008:577).
Dovoljno je da je uporaba nastupila na samom početku ili kraju relevantnog razdoblja, pod uvjetom da je riječ o stvarnoj uporabi (16/12/2008, T86/07, Deitech, EU:T:2008:577).
The exact decisive threshold proving genuine use cannot be defined out of context.
Nije moguće izvan konteksta utvrditi točan i odlučujući prag za dokazivanje stvarne uporabe.
The turnover and volume of sales of the product must always be assessed in relation to all the other relevant factors, such as the volume of business, production or marketing capacity, or the degree of diversification of the undertaking using the trade mark, and the characteristics of the products or services on the relevant market.
Promet i opseg prodaje proizvoda uvijek treba procjenjivati u odnosu na sve ostale bitne čimbenike, kao što su opseg poslovanja, proizvodna ili komercijalna sposobnost ili razina razlikovanja poduzeća uporabom žiga i obilježja proizvoda ili usluga na relevantnom tržištu.
Use need not 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 (11/03/2003, C40/01, Minimax, EU:C:2003:145, § 39; 08/07/2004, T203/02, Vitafruit, EU:T:2004:225, § 42).
Uporaba ne treba uvijek biti količinski značajna da bi se smatrala stvarnom, s obzirom na to da ona ovisi o obilježjima predmetnih proizvoda ili usluga na odgovarajućem tržištu (11/03/2003, C40/01, Minimax, EU:C:2003:145, § 39; 08/07/2004, T203/02, Vitafruit, EU:T:2004:225, § 42).
Low turnover and sales, in absolute terms, of a medium- or low-priced product might support the conclusion that use of the trade mark in question is not genuine.
Slab promet i prodaja proizvoda srednje ili niske cijene, u apsolutnom smislu, mogu potkrijepiti zaključak da uporaba predmetnog žiga nije stvarna.
However, with regard to expensive goods or an exclusive market, low turnover figures can be sufficient (04/09/2007, R 35/20072, DINKY, § 22).
Međutim, kada je riječ o skupim proizvodima ili ekskluzivnom tržištu, dostatan je i slab promet (04/09/2007, R 35/20072, DINKY, § 22).
It is, therefore, always necessary to take the characteristics of the market in question into account (08/07/2004, T334/01, Hipoviton, EU:T:2004:223, § 51).
Prema tome, uvijek je potrebno uzeti u obzir obilježja predmetnog tržišta (08/07/2004, T334/01, Hipoviton, EU:T:2004:223, § 51).
A de minimis rule cannot be laid down.
Primjena pravila de minimis ovdje se ne može propisati.
Use of the mark by a single client, which imports the products 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 (27/01/2004, C259/02, Laboratoire de la mer, EU:C:2004:50, § 24 et seq.).
Činjenica da žig upotrebljava jedan korisnik koji uvozi proizvode za koje je žig registriran može biti dostatna za dokazivanje stvarne uporabe ako se čini da djelatnost uvoza ima stvarno komercijalno opravdanje za nositelja žiga (27/01/2004, C259/02, Laboratoire de la mer, EU:C:2004:50, § 24 et seq.).
Genuine use is not excluded only because all use involves the same customer, as long as the trade mark is used publicly and outwardly and not solely within the undertaking that owns the earlier trade mark or within a distribution network owned or controlled by that undertaking (08/07/2004, T203/02, Vitafruit, EU:T:2004:225, § 50; 08/10/2014, T300/12, Fairglobe, EU:T:2014:864, § 36).
Stvarna uporaba nije isključena ako se odnosi na istog potrošača, ako je žig u uporabi javno i prema van, a ne samo u poduzeću koje je nositelj ranijeg žiga ili unutar distribucijske mreže u vlasništvu ili pod kontrolom tog poduzeća (08/07/2004, T203/02, Vitafruit, EU:T:2004:225, § 50; 08/10/2014, T300/12, Fairglobe, EU:T:2014:864, § 36).