natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
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).
The smaller the commercial volume of the exploitation of the mark, the more necessary it is for the opposing party to produce additional evidence to dispel any doubts as to its genuineness (08/07/2004, T334/01, Hipoviton, EU:T:2004:223, § 37). 
Što je manji komercijalni opseg iskorištavanja žiga, to je važnije da strana koja ulaže prigovor podnese dodatne dokaze kako bi uklonila moguću sumnju u pogledu stvarnosti uporabe (08/07/2004, T334/01, Hipoviton, EU:T:2004:223, § 37).
Concerning the ratio between the turnover generated by the sales of products under the earlier mark and the applicant's annual turnover, it should be noted that the degree of diversification of the activities of undertakings operating in one and the same market varies. 
Kada je riječ o omjeru prometa od prodaje proizvoda pod ranijim žigom i godišnjeg prometa podnositelja prijave, treba napomenuti da razina razlikovanja djelatnosti poduzeća koja djeluju na istovjetnom tržištu varira.
Moreover, the obligation to produce evidence of genuine use of an earlier trade mark is not designed to monitor the commercial strategy of an undertaking. 
Uostalom, obveza podnošenja dokaza o stvarnoj uporabi ranijeg žiga ne podrazumijeva nadzor komercijalne strategije poduzeća.
It may be economically and objectively justified for an undertaking to market a product or a range of products even if their share in the annual turnover of the undertaking in question is minimal (08/07/2004, T334/01, Hipoviton, EU:T:2004:223, § 49). 
Za poduzeće može biti gospodarski i objektivno opravdano da na tržište stavi proizvode ili asortiman proizvoda čak i ako je njihov udio u njegovu godišnjem prometu minimalan (08/07/2004, T334/01, Hipoviton, EU:T:2004:223, § 49).
Special circumstances, for example, lower sales figures during the initial marketing phase of a product, could be of relevance when assessing the genuineness of use (08/07/2004, T334/01, Hipoviton, EU:T:2004:223, § 53). 
Prilikom procjene stvarne uporabe mogu biti važne posebne okolnosti, na primjer slabiji prodajni rezultati tijekom početne faze stavljanja proizvoda na tržište (08/07/2004, T334/01, Hipoviton, EU:T:2004:223, § 53).
The initial phase of marketing a product may last more than a few months but it cannot be prolonged indefinitely (18/03/2015, T250/13, SMART WATER, EU:T:2015:160, § 54-55; confirmed 17/03/2016, C252/15 P, SMART WATER, EU:C:2016:178). 
Početna faza stavljanja proizvoda na tržište može trajati dulje od nekoliko mjeseci, ali ne može se produljiti na neodređeno vrijeme (18/03/2015, T250/13, SMART WATER, EU:T:2015:160, § 54-55; potvrđeno 17/03/2016, C252/15 P, SMART WATER, EU:C:2016:178).
2.6.2 Examples of insufficient use 
Primjeri nedostatne uporabe
2.6.3 Examples of sufficient use 
Primjeri dostatne uporabe
2.7 Use of the mark in forms different from that registered 
Uporaba žiga u obliku koji se razlikuje od onoga u kojem je registriran
Article 18 EUTMR states that use of the mark in a form different from that registered still constitutes use of the trade mark as long as the differing elements do not alter the distinctive character of the trade mark, regardless of whether or not the trade mark in the form as used is also registered in the name of the proprietor. 
Uredbe o žigu EU-a navodi se da se uporaba žiga u obliku koji se razlikuje od oblika u kojem je registriran i dalje smatra uporabom žiga ako različiti elementi ne mijenjaju razlikovni karakter žiga, bez obzira na to je li žig u obliku u kojem se upotrebljava također registriran na ime nositelja.
The purpose of this provision is to allow its proprietor to make variations in the sign that, without altering its distinctive character, enable it to be better adapted to the marketing and promotion requirements of the goods or services concerned (23/02/2006, T194/03, Bainbridge, EU:T:2006:65, § 50). 
Svrha je te odredbe omogućiti nositelju žiga da napravi promjene u znaku koje, bez mijenjanja razlikovnog karaktera žiga, omogućuju bolju prilagodbu uvjetima stavljanja na tržište i promoviranja predmetnih proizvoda ili usluga (23/02/2006, T194/03, Bainbridge, EU:T:2006:65, § 50).
The General Court further mentioned that strict conformity between the sign as used and the sign registered is not necessary. 
Opći sud nadalje je napomenuo da nije potrebna stroga sukladnost između znaka u uporabi i registriranog znaka.
However, the difference must be in negligible elements and the signs as used and registered must be broadly equivalent (23/02/2006, T194/03, Bainbridge, EU:T:2006:65, § 50). 
Međutim, razlika se treba sastojati od zanemarivih elemenata, dok znakovi u uporabi i oni registrirani trebaju biti umnogome jednaki (23/02/2006, T194/03, Bainbridge, EU:T:2006:65, § 50).
In order to decide whether the sign as used and the sign as registered are broadly equivalent, it must first be established what elements are negligible. 
Da bi se odlučilo jesu li znak u uporabi i onaj koji je registriran umnogome jednaki najprije treba utvrditi koji su elementi zanemarivi.
The General Court has developed criteria for doing so in several judgments. 
Opći sud razvio je kriterije za to u okviru nekoliko presuda.
Paragraph 2.7.2 will deal with these criteria. 
U odlomku 2.7.2. obrađuju se ti kriteriji.
Paragraph 2.7.3 will describe Office practice in relation to the ‘variation' of marks, ‘additions' of elements to marks and ‘omissions' of elements of marks. 
U odlomku 2.7.3. opisana je praksa Ureda u odnosu na „varijante” žigova, „dodavanja” elemenata žigovima i „izostavljanja” elemenata žigova.
2.7.2 Criteria of the Court 
Kriteriji Suda
In brief, the test developed by the Court consists of first determining what the distinctive and dominant elements of the registered sign are and then verifying if they are also present in the sign as used. 
Ukratko, test koji je sastavio Sud sastoji se prije svega od određivanja razlikovnih i dominantnih elemenata registriranog znaka, a zatim od provjere jesu li ti elementi prisutni u znaku i tijekom njegove uporabe.
The General Court has held that: 
Opći sud smatrao je:
the assessment of the distinctive or dominant character of one or more components of a complex trade mark must be based on the intrinsic qualities of each of those components, as well as on the relative position of the different components within the arrangement of the trade mark (24/11/2005, T135/04, Online Bus, EU:T:2005:419, § 36). 
da se procjena razlikovnog ili dominantnog karaktera jednog ili više sastavnih dijelova složenog žiga treba temeljiti na suštinskim svojstvima svakog od tih dijelova, kao i na relativnom položaju različitih sastavnih dijelova unutar žiga (24/11/2005, T135/04, Online Bus, EU:T:2005:419, § 36).
With regard to additions: 
Kada je riječ o dodavanjima:
several signs may be used simultaneously without altering the distinctive character of the registered sign (08/12/2005, T29/04, Cristal Castellblanch, EU:T:2005:438, § 34); 
može se upotrijebiti nekoliko znakova istodobno, bez mijenjanja razlikovnog karaktera registriranog znaka (08/12/2005, T29/04, Cristal Castellblanch, EU:T:2005:438, § 34);
if the addition is not distinctive, is weak and/or is not dominant, it does not alter the distinctive character of the registered trade mark (30/11/2009, T353/07, Coloris, EU:T:2009:475, § 2933 et seq.; 10/06/2010, T482/08, Atlas Transport, EU:T:2010:229, § 36 et seq.). 
dodatak koji nema razlikovni karakter, ili je slab i/ili nije dominantan, ne mijenja razlikovni karakter registriranog žiga (30/11/2009, T353/07, Coloris, EU:T:2009:475, § 2933 et seq.; 10/06/2010, T482/08, Atlas Transport, EU:T:2010:229, § 36 et seq.).
With regard to omissions: 
Kada je riječ o izostavljanjima:
if the omitted element is in a secondary position and not distinctive, its omission does not alter the distinctive character of the trade mark (24/11/2005, T135/04, Online Bus, EU:T:2005:419, § 37). 
ako izostavljeni element zauzima sekundarni položaj i nema razlikovni karakter, njegovo izostavljanje ne mijenja razlikovni karakter žiga (24/11/2005, T135/04, Online Bus, EU:T:2005:419, § 37).
2.7.3 Office practice 
Praksa Ureda
In general, it has to be assessed whether use of the mark constitutes an acceptable or unacceptable ‘variation' of its registered form. 
Općenito je potrebno procijeniti predstavlja li uporaba žiga prihvatljivu ili neprihvatljivu „varijantu” njegovog registriranog oblika.
Therefore, there are two questions to be answered. 
Prema tome, treba odgovoriti na dva pitanja.
Firstly, it must be clarified what is to be regarded as the distinctive character of the mark as registered . 
Prvo treba pojasniti što se smatra razlikovnim karakterom žiga koji je registriran.
Secondly, it must be evaluated whether the mark as used alters this distinctive character. 
Drugo, treba procijeniti mijenja li žig u uporabi taj razlikovni karakter.
These questions have to be answered on a case-by-case basis. 
Na ta pitanja treba odgovoriti od slučaja do slučaja.
[6: See the Guidelines, Part C, Opposition, Section 2, Double Identity and Likelihood of Confusion, Chapter 4, Comparison of Signs.] 
[6: Pogledajte Smjernice, dio C, Prigovor, odjeljak 2., Istovjetnost i vjerojatnost dovođenja u zabludu, poglavlje 4., Uspoređivanje znakova.]
There is interdependence between the strength of the distinctive character of a mark and the effect of alterations. 
Postoji međuovisnost između snage razlikovnog karaktera žiga i učinka izmjena.
Marks of strong distinctive character may be less influenced by changes than marks of limited distinctiveness. 
Izmjene će manje utjecati na žigove s jakim razlikovnim karakterom nego na žigove s ograničenom razlikovnošću.
Adding elements to or omitting elements from the mark are more likely to affect the distinctive character of marks of limited distinctiveness. 
Dodavanje ili izostavljanje elemenata iz žiga vjerojatnije će utjecati na razlikovni karakter žigova čija je razlikovnost ograničena.
Where a mark is composed of several elements, only one or some of which are distinctive and have rendered the mark as a whole registrable, an alteration of that distinctive element(s) or its omission or replacement by another element will generally mean that the distinctive character is altered. 
Kada se žig sastoji od nekoliko elemenata, od kojih samo jedan ili neki od njih imaju razlikovni karakter, zahvaljujući kojima se žig u cjelini može registrirati, mijenjanje tih razlikovnih elemenata ili njihovo izostavljanje ili zamjena drugim elementom općenito znači da je promijenjen razlikovni karakter žiga.
In order to determine whether the use of a variation of the mark should be accepted or whether the distinctive character is altered, account must be taken of the practices in the branch of business or trade concerned and the relevant public. 
Za utvrđivanje prihvaćanja uporabe varijante žiga ili mijenjanja razlikovnog karaktera žiga, treba voditi računa o trgovačkoj praksi ili praksi u predmetnoj grani poslovanja te o relevantnoj javnosti.
The following paragraphs contain a number of practical guidelines for assessing whether additions (paragraph 2.7.3.1), omissions (paragraph 2.7.3.2) and alterations in the form of the sign as used (paragraph 2.7.3.3) alter the distinctive character of the registered trade mark. 
U sljedećim odlomcima naveden je niz praktičnih smjernica za procjenu mijenjaju li dodavanja (odlomak 2.7.3.1.), izostavljanja (odlomak 2.7.3.2.) i izmjene oblika znaka koji je u uporabi (odlomak 2.7.3.3.) razlikovni karakter registriranog žiga.
2.7.3.1 Additions 
Dodavanja
As indicated above, with regard to additions, (i) several signs may be used simultaneously without altering the distinctive character of the registered sign and (ii) if the addition is non-distinctive or weak and/or not dominant, it does not alter the distinctive character of the registered trade mark. 
Kao što je prethodno navedeno u pogledu dodavanja, i. moguće je upotrebljavati nekoliko znakova istodobno bez mijenjanja razlikovnog karaktera registriranog znaka i ii. ako dodavanje nema razlikovni karakter ili je slabo i/ili nije dominantno, ono ne mijenja razlikovni karakter registriranog žiga.
The following paragraphs provide examples of these two types of scenarios: 
U sljedećim odlomcima navedeni su primjeri tih dviju vrsta scenarija:
use of several signs simultaneously; 
uporaba nekoliko znakova istodobno;
additions of other verbal elements; 
dodavanja drugih verbalnih elemenata;
additions of figurative elements. 
dodavanja figurativnih elemenata.
Use of several marks or signs simultaneously 
Uporaba nekoliko žigova ili znakova istodobno
It is quite common in some market areas for goods and services to bear not only their individual mark, but also the mark of the business or product group (‘house mark'). 
U nekim područjima tržišta sasvim je uobičajeno da su proizvodi i usluge označeni ne samo svojim pojedinačnim žigom, nego i žigom poduzeća ili skupine proizvoda („matični žig”).
In these cases, the registered mark is not used in a different form, but the two independent marks are validly used at the same time. 
U tim okolnostima žig se ne upotrebljava u drukčijem obliku, već se dva odvojena žiga valjano upotrebljavaju istodobno.
There is no legal precept in the European Union trade mark system that obliges the opponent to provide evidence of the earlier mark alone when genuine use is required within the meaning of Article 47 EUTMR. 
Ne postoji pravni propis u sustavu žigova Europske unije kojim se podnositelj prigovora obvezuje na pružanje dokaza samo o ranijem žigu kada se stvarna uporaba nalaže u smislu članka 47.
It is common practice in the trade to depict independent marks in different sizes and typeface, so these clear differences, which emphasise the house mark, indicate that two different marks are being used jointly but autonomously (07/08/2014, R 1880/20131, HEALTHPRESSO / PRESSO, § 42). 
Uobičajena je trgovačka praksa prikazivati neovisne žigove različitih veličina i tipografskih obilježja pa te jasne razlike, koje naglašavaju matični žig, pokazuju da se dva različita žiga upotrebljavaju zajednički, ali samostalno (07/08/2014, R 1880/20131, HEALTHPRESSO / PRESSO, § 42).
The Court has confirmed that the condition of genuine use of a registered trade mark may be satisfied both where it has been used as part of another composite mark or where it is used in conjunction with another mark, even if the combination of marks is itself registered as a trade mark (18/04/2013, C12/12, Colloseum Holding, EU:C:2013:253, § 36.). 
Sud je potvrdio da se uvjet stvarne uporabe registriranog žiga može ispuniti i kada se žig upotrebljava kao dio nekog drugog složenog žiga ili kada se upotrebljava u kombinaciji s nekim drugim žigom, čak i ako je takva kombinacija žigova sama po sebi registrirana kao žig (18/04/2013, C12/12, Colloseum Holding, EU:C:2013:253, § 36.).