natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The opponent must also prove that the case fulfils all the conditions under the relevant provisions.
Vložnik ugovora mora dokazati še, da ugovor izpolnjuje vse pogoje na podlagi zadevnih določb.
Where the evidence concerning the filing or registration of the earlier protected designations of origin or protected geographical indications, or the evidence concerning the content of the relevant national law is accessible from a source recognised by the Office, the opponent may submit such evidence by making a reference to that source.
Če so dokazi o vložitvi prijave ali registraciji prejšnjih zaščitenih označb porekla ali zaščitenih geografskih označb ali dokazi o vsebini zadevnega nacionalnega prava dostopni prek spletnega vira, ki ga priznava Urad, lahko vložnik ugovora predloži takšne dokaze s sklicevanjem na navedeni vir.
All official publications and national databases are acceptable to the extent that they originate from the government or official body of the Member State concerned, provided they are publicly accessible and free of charge.
V ta namen so sprejemljive vse uradne publikacije in nacionalne podatkovne zbirke, kolikor izvirajo od vladnega ali uradnega organa zadevne države članice, in sicer če so javno dostopne in brezplačne.
Unlike for earlier rights invoked under Article 8(4) EUTMR, the requirement to submit evidence that use of the sign has been of more than local significance does not apply to earlier rights invoked under Article 8(6) EUTMR.
V nasprotju s prejšnjimi pravicami, ki se uveljavljajo v skladu s členom 8(4) uredbe o blagovni znamki EU, se zahteva po predložitvi dokazov, da je uporaba znaka več kot le lokalnega pomena, ne uporablja za prejšnje pravice, ki se uveljavljajo v skladu s členom 8(6) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU.
For more details regarding substantiation of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications, see the Guidelines, Part C, Opposition, Section 4, Rights under Article 8(4) and 8(6) EUTMR, paragraph 5 (Article 8(6) EUTMR - the Protection of Geographical Indications).
Za več podrobnosti o utemeljitvi zaščitenih označb porekla in zaščitenih geografskih označb glej Smernice, del C: Ugovor, razdelek 4: Pravice na podlagi člena 8(4) in (6) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU, odstavek 5 (člen 8(6) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU - zaščita geografskih označb).
4.2.4.5 Mark filed by an agent or representative
Znamka, ki jo vloži posrednik ali zastopnik
Article 7(2)(c) EUTMDR
Člen 7(2)(c) Delegirane uredbe
This concerns the case where an agent or representative of the proprietor of a trade mark applies for registration of that trade mark at the Office.
To se nanaša na primer, v katerem posrednik ali zastopnik imetnika blagovne znamke zaprosi za registracijo navedene blagovne znamke pri Uradu.
The proprietor can oppose the application of the disloyal applicant.
Imetnik lahko vloži ugovor zoper prijavo nelojalnega prijavitelja.
The opponent has to prove its ownership of the trade mark and the time of acquisition of that mark.
Vložnik ugovora mora dokazati svoje lastništvo blagovne znamke in čas njene pridobitve.
As the trade mark can be either a registered trade mark or a non-registered trade mark, the opponent may submit either evidence of registration anywhere in the world or evidence of acquisition of rights through use.
Ker je lahko blagovna znamka bodisi registrirana bodisi neregistrirana blagovna znamka, lahko vložnik ugovora predloži dokaze o registraciji kjer koli na svetu ali dokaze o pridobitvi pravic z uporabo.
The opponent also has to submit evidence of an agent-representative relationship.
Vložnik ugovora mora predložiti tudi dokaze o razmerju s posrednikom ali zastopnikom.
4.2.5 Non-compliance with the substantiation requirements
Neupoštevanje zahtev glede utemeljitve
Article 46(4) EUTMR
Člen 46(4) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU
Article 7 and Article 8(1) and (7) EUTMDR
Člen 7 ter člen 8(1) in (7) Delegirane uredbe
The Office sets the opponent a time limit of 2 months, starting on the date when the adversarial part of the proceedings is deemed to commence, to complete the opposition by submitting facts, evidence and arguments in support (‘substantiation time limit').
Urad vložniku ugovora določi dvomesečni rok, ki začne teči na dan, ki šteje kot začetek kontradiktornega dela postopka, v katerem mora dopolniti ugovor s predložitvijo dejstev, dokazov in navedb v njegovo podporo (rok za utemeljitev).
This time limit can be extended pursuant to Article 68 EUTMDR or, if missed, the opponent can apply for a reinstatement into the missed time limit subject to the conditions of Article 104 EUTMR (restitutio in integrum) or Article 105 EUTMR (continuation of proceedings).
Ta rok je mogoče podaljšati v skladu s členom 68 Delegirane uredbe, pri čemer lahko vložnik ugovora, ki rok zamudi, vloži prošnjo za ponovno vzpostavitev zamujenega roka ob upoštevanju pogojev iz člena 104 Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU (vrnitev v prejšnje stanje) ali člena 105 Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU (nadaljevanje postopka).
Article 8(1) EUTMDR provides that if the opponent has not provided any evidence by the time of expiry of the substantiation time limit, or the evidence provided is manifestly irrelevant or manifestly insufficient to meet the requirements laid down in Article 7(2) EUTMDR for any of the earlier rights, the opposition will be rejected as unfounded.
Člen 8(1) Delegirane uredbe določa, da bo ugovor zavrnjen kot neutemeljen, če vložnik ugovora do izteka roka za utemeljitev ni predložil nobenega dokaza oziroma če so predloženi dokazi očitno neustrezni ali ne zadoščajo zahtevam iz člena 7(2) Delegirane uredbe za katero koli prejšnjo pravico.
If none of the earlier rights on which the opposition is based has been substantiated, the Office closes the adversarial part of the proceedings without inviting the applicant to submit observations in reply.
Če ni utemeljena nobena od prejšnjih pravic, na katerih temelji ugovor, Urad konča kontradiktorni del postopka, ne da bi prijavitelja pozval k predložitvi pripomb v odgovor.
The Office is not required to inform the opponent what facts or evidence could have been submitted (17/06/2008, T420/03, BoomerangTV, EU:T:2008:203, § 76).
Uradu ni treba obvestiti vložnika ugovora, katera dejstva ali dokazi bi lahko predložil (17/06/2008, T420/03, BoomerangTV, EU:T:2008:203, § 76).
Subsequently, the opposition is rejected pursuant to Article 8(1) EUTMDR.
Ugovor se zato v skladu s členom 8(1) Delegirane uredbe zavrne.
It follows that where the opponent has failed to submit any evidence at all, the opposition will be rejected.
Iz tega izhaja, da bo ugovor zavrnjen, če vložnik ugovora ne predloži nobenih dokazov.
It must be deemed that no evidence has been submitted if the evidence is not accompanied by a translation into the language of the proceedings, as such non-translated evidence cannot be taken into account pursuant to the last sentence of Article 7(4) EUTMDR.
Šteti je treba, da dokazi niso bili predloženi, če jim ni priložen prevod v jezik postopka, saj takšnih neprevedenih dokazov v skladu z zadnjim stavkom člena 7(4) Delegirane uredbe ni mogoče upoštevati.
The evidence submitted is ‘manifestly irrelevant' if, by its nature, it cannot serve to establish the validity and existence of the earlier right invoked (for example, if it proves the existence of an earlier right that was not invoked in the notice of opposition).
Predloženi dokazi so očitno neustrezni, če se po svoji naravi ne morejo uporabiti za opredelitev veljavnosti in obstoja prejšnje pravice, ki se uveljavlja (npr. če dokazujejo obstoj prejšnje pravice, ki se v ugovoru ni uveljavljala).
The evidence submitted is ‘manifestly insufficient' if it does not meet the formal requirements of substantiation.
Predloženi dokazi očitno ne zadoščajo, če ne izpolnjujejo formalnih zahtev glede utemeljitve.
Upon expiry of the substantiation time limit, the Office carries out a preliminary examination of substantiation.
Urad ob izteku roka za utemeljitev opravi predhoden preizkus utemeljitve.
If the opponent submitted evidence for at least one of the earlier rights invoked in the opposition that cannot be qualified as ‘manifestly irrelevant' or ‘manifestly insufficient', the Office continues the adversarial part of the proceedings by forwarding the opponent's submission to the applicant with an invitation to submit observations.
Če je vložnik ugovora predložil dokaze za vsaj eno od prejšnjih pravic, ki se uveljavljajo v ugovoru, pri čemer ni mogoče šteti, da so ti dokazi očitno neustrezni ali da očitno ne zadoščajo, Urad nadaljuje kontradiktorni del postopka, pri čemer prijavitelju predloži vlogo vložnika ugovora in ga pozove k predložitvi pripomb.
If, upon further examination of the file, the evidence submitted within the substantiation time limit is still deemed insufficient to meet the requirements laid down in Article 7(2) EUTMDR, the opposition will be rejected in relation to that earlier right pursuant to Article 8(7) EUTMDR.
Če se po nadaljnji proučitvi spisa še vedno šteje, da so dokazi, predloženi v roku za utemeljitev, nezadostni za izpolnitev zahtev iz člena 7(2) Delegirane uredbe, bo ugovor v skladu s členom 8(7) Delegirane uredbe zavrnjen v zvezi z navedeno prejšnjo pravico.
Furthermore, since the initial substantiation check is limited to finding one substantiated earlier right on the basis of which the procedure can continue, if the opposition cannot be fully upheld on the basis of this substantiated earlier right, a further examination of the file in relation to the remaining earlier rights is required.
Ker je prvotno preverjanje utemeljitve omejeno na iskanje ene utemeljene prejšnje pravice, na podlagi katere se postopek lahko nadaljuje, je poleg tega, če ugovora na podlagi te utemeljene prejšnje pravice ni mogoče v celoti potrditi, potrebna nadaljnja proučitev spisa v zvezi s preostalimi prejšnjimi pravicami.
If this examination reveals that the evidence relating to these earlier rights is non-existent, manifestly irrelevant, manifestly insufficient or otherwise insufficient to meet the requirements laid down in Article 7(2), the opposition will also be rejected in relation to these rights pursuant to Article 8(7) EUTMDR.
Če je iz te proučitve razvidno, da dokazov v zvezi s temi prejšnjimi pravicami ni oziroma da so očitno neustrezni, očitno nezadostni ali kako drugače nezadostni za izpolnitev zahtev iz člena 7(2) Delegirane uredbe, bo ugovor v skladu s členom 8(7) Delegirane uredbe zavrnjen tudi v zvezi s temi pravicami.
4.2.6 Facts and evidence submitted after the substantiation time limit
Dejstva in dokazi, predloženi po roku za utemeljitev
Article 95(2) EUTMR
Člen 95(2) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU
Article 8(5) EUTMDR
Člen 8(5) Delegirane uredbe
All facts and evidence on which the opponent bases its opposition have to be submitted within the substantiation time limit established in Article 7(1) EUTMDR.
Vsa dejstva in dokazi, na katerih vložnik ugovora utemelji svoj ugovor, je treba predložiti v roku za utemeljitev iz člena 7(1) Delegirane uredbe.
Any fact or evidence submitted after the substantiation time limit is, therefore, late.
Vsako dejstvo ali dokaz, predložen po roku za utemeljitev, je zato prepozno predložen.
Nevertheless, if the opponent submits facts or evidence to substantiate the opposition after the substantiation time limit, the Office may take into account such facts or evidence in exercise of its discretionary power pursuant to Article 95(2) EUTMR, subject to the conditions of Article 8(5) EUTMDR.
Če vložnik ugovora dejstva ali dokaze za utemeljitev ugovora predloži po izteku roka za utemeljitev, lahko Urad uveljavi svojo diskrecijsko pravico in v skladu s členom 95(2) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU vseeno upošteva takšna dejstva ali dokaze ob upoštevanju pogojev iz člena 8(5) Delegirane uredbe.
In that context, it must be assessed first, whether the Office can exercise any discretionary power and, second, if so, how to exercise it, that is, whether to admit or reject such late facts or evidence.
V tem okviru je treba najprej presoditi, ali lahko Urad uveljavlja svojo diskrecijsko pravico, in nato, če jo lahko, kako naj jo uveljavlja, tj. ali naj takšna prepozno predložena dejstva ali dokaz sprejme ali zavrne.
4.2.6.1 Whether discretionary power can be exercised
Ali je diskrecijsko pravico mogoče uveljavljati?
According to Article 8(5) EUTMDR, first sentence, the Office may exercise its discretionary power if the late facts or evidence supplement relevant facts or evidence submitted by the opponent in due time (‘initial facts or evidence').
Urad lahko v skladu s prvim stavkom člena 8(5) Delegirane uredbe uveljavlja svojo diskrecijsko pravico, če prepozno predložena dejstva ali dokazi dopolnjujejo zadevna dejstva ali dokaze, ki jih vložnik ugovora predloži pravočasno (v nadaljnjem besedilu: prvotna dejstva ali dokazi).
It is clear therefore, that no discretionary power applies if the late facts or evidence relate to an earlier right or ground of opposition invoked in relation to which no initial evidence was filed at all within the substantiation time limit.
Zato je jasno, da se diskrecijska pravica ne uporablja, če se prepozno predložena dejstva ali dokazi nanašajo na prejšnjo pravico ali razlog za ugovor, ki se uveljavlja in v zvezi s katerim v roku za utemeljitev sploh niso bili predloženi nobeni prvotni dokazi.
The same applies regarding facts.
Enako velja v zvezi z dejstvi.
However, where some initial fact or evidence was submitted, the Office will exercise its discretionary power whether to admit late facts or evidence only if the following conditions are met:
Če pa so bila predložena nekatera prvotna dejstva ali dokazi, bo Urad pri odločanju, ali naj sprejme prepozno predložena dejstva ali dokaze, uveljavljal svojo diskrecijsko pravico le, če so izpolnjeni naslednji pogoji:
initial evidence submitted within the substantiation time limit is relevant and not manifestly insufficient, and
prvotni dokazi, predloženi v roku za utemeljitev, so relevantni in niso očitno nezadostni in
the late fact or evidence relates to the same legal requirement that the initial fact or evidence purported to prove.
prepozno predloženo dejstvo ali dokaz se nanaša na isto pravno zahtevo, ki naj bi bila dokazana s prvotnim dejstvom ali dokazom.
Registration certificates that do not contain all the information necessary to establish the existence, scope or validity of the earlier mark concerned would, in principle, be found to be manifestly insufficient evidence, since the content required is precisely and exhaustively established by the regulations.
V zvezi s potrdili o registraciji, ki ne vsebujejo vseh informacij, potrebnih za opredelitev obstoja, obsega ali veljavnosti zadevne prejšnje znamke, bi se načeloma ugotovilo, da so očitno nezadostni dokazi, saj je zahtevana vsebina natančno in izčrpno določena z uredbami.
The Office will find that the late fact or evidence relates to the same legal requirement as the initial fact or evidence only when both sets refer to the same earlier mark, to the same ground and, within the same ground, to the same requirement.
Urad bo ugotovil, da se prepozno predloženo dejstvo ali dokaz nanaša na isto pravno zahtevo kot prvotno dejstvo ali dokaz šele, ko se oba sklopa nanašata na isto prejšnjo znamko, isti razlog in - v okviru istega razloga - na isto zahtevo.
No discretionary power applies where the Office has informed the parties that the opposition will be rejected as unfounded under Article 8(1) EUTMDR.
Diskrecijska pravica se ne uporablja, če je Urad stranki obvestil, da bo ugovor zavrnjen kot neutemeljen v skladu s členom 8(1) Delegirane uredbe.
In those cases, the proceedings will be resumed only if the opponent requests continuation of proceedings in accordance with Article 105 EUTMR or restitutio in integrum in accordance with Article 104 EUTMR.
V obeh primerih se postopek nadaljuje le, če vložnik ugovora zahteva nadaljevanje postopka v skladu s členom 105 Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU ali vrnitev v prejšnje stanje v skladu s členom 104 Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU.
For further information on continuation of proceedings, see the Guidelines, Part A, General Rules, Section 1, Means of Communication, Time Limits; and for further information on restitutio in integrum, see the Guidelines, Part A, General Rules, Section 8, Restitutio in Integrum.
Za več informacij o nadaljevanju postopka glej Smernice, del A: Splošna pravila, razdelek 1: Komunikacijska sredstva, roki, za več informacij o vrnitvi v prejšnje stanje pa Smernice, del A: Splošna pravila, razdelek 8: Vrnitev v prejšnje stanje (restitutio in integrum).
4.2.6.2 Whether late facts or evidence should be admitted or rejected
Ali je treba prepozno predložena dejstva ali dokaze sprejeti ali zavrniti?
For the purposes of exercising its discretionary power, the Office must take into account, in particular, the stage of proceedings and whether the facts or evidence are, prima facie, likely to be relevant for the outcome of the case and whether there are valid reasons for the late submission of the facts or evidence.
Urad mora za namene uveljavljanja svoje diskrecijske pravice upoštevati zlasti fazo postopka in to, ali so dejstva ali dokazi na prvi pogled verjetno pomembni za izid zadeve in ali obstajajo tehtni razlogi za zapoznelo predložitev dokazov ali dokazil.
The stage of the proceedings indicates how advanced the proceedings are at the time of submitting the late evidence.
Faza postopka kaže, v kako pozni fazi je postopek ob predložitvi prepoznih dokazov.
The late evidence is prima facie relevant, if it appears to have an impact on the assessment and outcome of the case.
Prepozno predloženi dokazi so na prvi pogled pomembni, če se zdi, da vplivajo na presojo in izid zadeve.
Valid reasons are typically where the supplementing evidence was not yet available before the expiry of the substantiation time limit.
Tehtni razlogi običajno obstajajo, če dopolnilni dokazi pred iztekom roka za utemeljitev še niso bili na voljo.
There may be other valid reasons.
Obstajajo lahko drugi tehtni razlogi.
These factors are interdependent.
Ti dejavniki so med medsebojno odvisni.
The later the stage of proceedings, the stronger must be the reason for late submission or the relevance of the evidence.
Poznejša ko je faza postopka, tehtnejši mora biti razlog za zapoznelo predložitev ali pomembnost dokazov.
Therefore, additional facts or evidence can be accepted if, prima facie, they are likely to be relevant for the outcome of the case and are submitted at an early stage of the proceedings with a justification for why they are being submitted at this stage of the proceedings.
Zato je dodatna dejstva ali dokaze mogoče sprejeti, če se na prvi pogled zdi, da so verjetno pomembni za izid zadeve, in če so predloženi v zgodnji fazi postopka skupaj z utemeljitvijo, zakaj so predloženi v zadevni fazi postopka.
There may be other relevant factors.
Obstajajo lahko drugi upoštevni dejavniki.
The intention to prolong the proceedings by submitting evidence in parts (delaying tactics), if the circumstances of the case permit this conclusion, argues against the admission of late evidence.
Ob nameri, da se postopek podaljša s predložitvijo dokazov v delih (taktika zavlačevanja), če okoliščine zadeve omogočajo to ugotovitev, se prepozno predloženi dokazi ne sprejmejo.
Also, the fact that the requirements to be proven are circumscribed in detail in the law or that the Office has explicitly drawn the opponent's attention to those requirements argues against admitting late evidence.
Proti njihovemu sprejetju je tudi dejstvo, da so zahteve, ki jih je treba dokazati, podrobno zamejene s pravom ali da je Urad vložnika ugovora nanje izrecno opozoril.
The natural difficulties involved in obtaining the evidence are not, as such, a valid reason for its belated submission.
Osnovne težave pri pridobivanju dokazov niso tehten razlog za zapoznelo predložitev.
4.2.6.3 Treatment of late evidence in proceedings
Obravnava prepozno predloženih dokazov v postopku
Facts or evidence received after the set time limit will be forwarded to the other party for information purposes without any indication of whether it has been accepted or refused, and will be examined at a later stage, when taking the decision.
Dejstva ali dokazi, prejeti po določenem roku, bodo posredovani drugi stranki v vednost brez navedbe, ali so bila sprejeti ali zavrnjeni, in bodo proučeni v poznejši fazi, in sicer v fazi sprejemanja odločitve.
The proceedings will be re-opened and a second round of observations will be granted if necessary - namely, if the Office is considering accepting late facts or evidence and the applicant has not yet had the opportunity to comment on them.
Postopek bo znova odprt, pri čemer bo po potrebi odobren drugi krog za predložitev pripomb, tj. če Urad obravnava sprejetje prepozno predloženih dejstev ali dokazov in če prosilec še ni imel možnosti, da predloži pripombe k njim.
Application of the discretionary power must be reasoned in the decision concluding the opposition.
Uveljavljanje diskrecijske pravice mora biti obrazloženo v odločbi, s katero se odloči o ugovoru.
However, where the initial evidence is in itself sufficient to prove the earlier rights and grounds of opposition invoked, there is no need to consider late additional evidence.
Če pa so prvotni dokazi sami po sebi zadostni za dokaz prejšnjih pravic in razlogov za ugovor, ki se uveljavljajo, prepozno predloženih dodatnih dokazov ni treba upoštevati.
4.3 Translation/changes of language during the opposition proceedings
Prevod/spremembe jezika med postopkom ugovora
Pursuant to general rules set in Article 146(9) EUTMR and Article 24 EUTMIR, most submissions of the parties in opposition proceedings have to be in the language of the proceedings in order to be taken into account.
V skladu s splošnimi pravili iz člena 146(9) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU in člena 24 Izvedbene uredbe mora biti večina dokumentov in stališč, ki jih stranki predložita v postopku ugovora, v jeziku postopka, da bi se upoštevali.
However, for different submissions there are different rules to be applied.
Za različne predložene dokumente in stališča pa se uporabljajo različna pravila.
4.3.1 Translations of evidence submitted to substantiate the opposition and of facts, evidence and arguments submitted by the opponent to complete its file
Prevodi dokazov, predloženih za utemeljitev ugovora, ter dejstev, dokazov in navedb, ki jih za dopolnitev spisa predloži vložnik ugovora
Articles 7(4) and (5) and 8(1) EUTMDR
Člen 7(4) in (5) ter člen 8(1) Delegirane uredbe
Article 25(1) EUTMIR
Člen 25(1) Izvedbene uredbe
On the basis of Article 24 EUTMIR, a distinction should be made between 1) evidence of filing, registration or renewal certificates or equivalent documents, and any provisions of the applicable national law; 2) other evidence submitted to substantiate the opposition; and 3) facts and arguments submitted by the opponent to complete its file.
Na podlagi člena 24 Izvedbene uredbe je treba razlikovati med 1) potrdili o vložitvi, registraciji ali podaljšanju oziroma enakovrednimi dokumenti in vsemi določbami nacionalnega prava, ki se uporablja, 2) drugimi dokazi, predloženimi za utemeljitev ugovora, ter 3) dejstvi in navedbami, ki jih za dopolnitev spisa predloži vložnik ugovora.
4.3.1.1 Translation of evidence of filing, registration or renewal certificates or equivalent documents, and provisions of the applicable national law
Prevodi potrdil o vložitvi, registraciji ali podaljšanju ali enakovrednih dokumentov ter določb nacionalnega prava, ki se uporablja
Pursuant to Article 7(4) EUTMDR, any filing, registration or renewal certificates or equivalent documents, as well as any provisions of the applicable national law governing the acquisition of rights and their scope of protection, submitted by the opponent to substantiate the opposition must be either in the language of the proceedings, or be accompanied by a translation into that language.
V skladu s členom 7(4) Delegirane uredbe morajo biti vsa potrdila o vložitvi, registraciji ali podaljšanju oziroma enakovredni dokumenti - in katere koli določbe nacionalnega prava, ki se uporablja in ureja pridobivanje pravic in obseg njihovega varstva -, ki jih predloži vložnik ugovora za utemeljitev ugovora, v jeziku postopka ali se morajo predložiti skupaj s prevodom v ta jezik.