natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
However, when it is claimed that such circumstances have occurred, the corresponding evidence must demonstrate this. 
Kadar pa se trdi, da so nastale takšne okoliščine, je treba to potrditi z ustreznimi dokazi.
For example, it cannot be assumed, merely because of the principle of free trade in the European Union, that goods put on the market in Member State X have also penetrated the market of Member State Y in significant quantities. 
Na primer, samo zaradi načela proste trgovine v Evropski uniji ni mogoče sklepati, da je blago, dano na trg v državi članici X, v velikih količinah prodrlo tudi na trg države članice Y.
Indications of the duration of use are particularly useful for determining the longevity of the mark. 
Podatki o trajanju uporabe so zlasti koristni za opredelitev življenjske dobe znamke.
The longer the mark has been used in the market, the larger will be the number of consumers that are likely to have encountered it, and the more likely it is that such consumers will have encountered the mark more than once. 
Dlje, kot se znamka uporablja na trgu, večje je število potrošnikov, ki bi lahko prišli v stik z njo, in večja je verjetnost, da so taki potrošniki prišli v stik z njo več kot enkrat.
For example, a market presence of 45, 50 or 100-plus years is considered a strong indication of reputation. 
Na primer, 45-, 50- ali več kot 100-letna navzočnost na trgu se šteje za pomemben znak ugleda.
The duration of use of the mark should not be inferred by mere reference to the term of its registration. 
O trajanju uporabe znamke ni mogoče sklepati samo iz sklicevanja na datum njene registracije.
Registration and use do not necessarily coincide, as the mark may have been put to actual use either before or after it was filed. 
Ni nujno, da registracija in uporaba sovpadata, saj se je lahko znamka dejansko začela uporabljati pred vložitvijo prijave ali po njej.
Therefore, where the opponent invokes actual use preceding the term of registration, it must prove that such use actually began before it applied for its mark. 
Zato mora vložnik ugovora, kadar trdi, da se je znamka dejansko uporabljala dlje, kot je registrirana, dokazati, da se je taka uporaba resnično začela, preden je vložil prijavo za svojo znamko.
Nevertheless, a long registration period may sometimes serve as an indirect indication of a long presence on the market, as it would be unusual for a proprietor to maintain a registered mark for many decades without any economic interest behind it. 
Vendar se lahko dolgo obdobje registracije včasih uporabi kot posreden znak dolge navzočnosti na trgu, saj bi bilo nenavadno, da bi imel imetnik znamko registrirano več desetletij brez ekonomskega interesa.
In the end, the decisive element is whether the earlier mark had a reputation at the time of filing of the contested application. 
Nenazadnje je odločilni element, ali je prejšnja znamka imela ugled, ko je bila vložena izpodbijana prijava.
Whether that reputation also existed at some earlier point in time is legally irrelevant. 
S pravnega vidika ni pomembno, ali je ugled imela že pred tem.
Therefore, evidence of continuous use up to the filing date of the application will be a positive indicator of reputation. 
Zato so dokazi o neprekinjeni uporabi do datuma vložitve prijave pozitiven kazalnik ugleda.
By contrast, if use of the mark was suspended over a significant period, or if the period between the latest evidence of use and the filing of the EUTM application is quite long, it will be more difficult to conclude that the mark's reputation survived the interruption of use, or that it subsisted until the filing date of the application (see paragraph 3.1.2.5 above). 
Če pa je bila uporaba znamke prekinjena za daljše obdobje ali če je obdobje med zadnjim dokazom o uporabi in vložitvijo prijave blagovne znamke EU precej dolgo, je tako težje ugotoviti, da je ugled znamke preživel prekinitev uporabe ali da se je ohranil do datuma vložitve prijave (glej odstavek 3.1.2.5 zgoraj).
3.1.3.6 Promotional activities 
Promocijske dejavnosti
The nature and scale of the promotional activities undertaken by the opponent are useful indications when assessing the reputation of the mark, to the extent that these activities were undertaken to build up a brand image and enhance trade mark awareness among the public. 
Vrsta in obseg promocijskih dejavnosti vložnika ugovora sta koristna podatka pri presoji ugleda znamke, če so bile te dejavnosti namenjene izoblikovanju podobe znamke in izboljšanju poznanosti znamke v javnosti.
Therefore, a long, intensive and widespread promotional campaign may be a strong indication that the mark has acquired a reputation among the potential or actual purchasers of the goods in question, and that it may actually have become known beyond the circle of the actual purchasers of those goods. 
Zato je lahko dolga, intenzivna in široka promocijska kampanja pomemben znak, da je znamka pridobila ugled med morebitnimi ali dejanskimi kupci zadevnega blaga in je morda postala znana zunaj kroga dejanskih kupcev tega blaga.
Even though it cannot be ruled out that a mark acquires a reputation before any actual use, promotional activities will usually not be sufficient on their own for establishing that the earlier mark has indeed acquired a reputation (see paragraph 3.1.3.4 above). 
Čeprav ni mogoče izključiti, da znamka pridobi ugled pred dejansko uporabo, promocijske dejavnosti same navadno ne zadostujejo za ugotovitev, da je prejšnja znamka resnično pridobila ugled (glej odstavek 3.1.3.4 zgoraj).
For example, it will be difficult to prove knowledge amongst a significant part of the public exclusively by reference to promotion or advertising, carried out as preparatory acts for the launching of a new product, as the actual impact of publicity on the perception of the public will be difficult to measure without reference to sales. 
Na primer, težko je dokazati poznanost pri znatnem delu javnosti samo s sklicevanjem na promocijo ali oglaševanje v okviru priprav na dajanje novega izdelka na trg, saj je dejanski učinek oglaševanja na zaznavanje javnosti težko izmeriti brez sklicevanja na prodajo.
For example, advertising on a nationwide TV channel or in a prestigious periodical should be given more weight than campaigns of a regional or local scope, especially if coupled with high audience or circulation figures. 
Na primer, oglaševanje na televizijskem programu z nacionalnim dometom ali v prestižnem periodičnem tisku je treba obravnavati kot pomembnejše od kampanje regionalnega ali lokalnega obsega, zlasti če je povezano z velikim številom občinstva ali veliko naklado.
Likewise, the sponsoring of prestigious athletic or cultural events may be a further indication of intensive promotion, as such schemes often involve a considerable investment. 
Podobno je lahko sponzoriranje prestižnih športnih ali kulturnih dogodkov dodaten znak intenzivne promocije, saj taki programi pogosto vključujejo precejšnje naložbe.
Furthermore, the contents of the advertising strategy chosen by the opponent can be useful for revealing the kind of image the opponent is trying to create for its brand. 
Poleg tega je lahko vsebina oglaševalske strategije, ki jo je izbral vložnik ugovora, koristna pri ugotavljanju, kakšno podobo želi vložnik ugovora ustvariti za svojo znamko.
This may be of particular importance when assessing the possibility of detriment to, or unfair advantage being taken of, a particular image allegedly conveyed by the mark, since the existence and contents of such an image must be abundantly clear from the evidence submitted by the opponent (see paragraph 3.4 below). 
To je lahko zlasti pomembno za presojo morebitnega oškodovanja ali neupravičenega izkoriščanja neke podobe, ki naj bi jo sporočala znamka, saj morata biti obstoj in vsebina take podobe dovolj razvidna iz dokazov, ki jih je predložil vložnik ugovora (glej odstavek 3.4 v nadaljevanju).
3.1.3.7 Other factors 
Drugi dejavniki
The Court has made clear that the above list of factors is only indicative and has underlined that all the facts relevant to the particular case must be taken into consideration when assessing the reputation of the earlier mark (14/09/1999, C375/97, Chevy, EU:C:1999:408, § 27). 
Sodišče je pojasnilo, da je zgoraj navedeni seznam dejavnikov samo okviren, in poudarilo, da je treba pri presoji ugleda prejšnje znamke upoštevati vsa dejstva, ki so pomembna za posamezni primer (14/09/1999, C375/97, Chevy, EU:C:1999:408, § 27).
Other factors may be found in Court case-law dealing with enhanced distinctiveness through use, or in WIPO's Joint Recommendation. 
Drugi dejavniki so na voljo v sodni praksi Sodišča, ki obravnava povečani razlikovalni učinek z uporabo, ali skupnem priporočilu organizacije WIPO.
Therefore, depending on their relevance in each case, the following factors may be added: record of successful enforcement; number of registrations; certification and awards; and the value associated with the mark. 
Zato se lahko, glede na njihov pomen za posamezen primer, dodajo naslednji dejavniki: evidenca primerov uspešnega uveljavljanja varstva, število registracij, certifikati in nagrade ter vrednost, povezana z znamko.
Record of successful enforcement 
Evidenca primerov uspešnega uveljavljanja varstva
Records of successful enforcement of a mark against dissimilar goods or services are important because they may demonstrate that, at least in relation to other traders, there is acceptance of protection against dissimilar goods or services. 
Evidenca primerov uspešnega uveljavljanja varstva znamke pred različnim blagom ali storitvami je pomembna, saj lahko pokaže, da je bilo vsaj v zvezi z drugimi gospodarskimi subjekti priznano varstvo pred različnim blagom ali storitvami.
Such records may consist of the successful prosecution of complaints outside the courts, such as the acceptance of cease and desist requests, delimitation agreements in trade mark cases, etc. 
Ta evidenca primerov lahko vključuje uspešno zunajsodno rešitev pritožb, kot na primer sprejetje zahtev za opustitev ravnanja, razmejitveni sporazumi v sporih glede znamk itd.
Furthermore, evidence showing that the reputation of the opponent's mark has been repeatedly recognised and protected against infringing acts by decisions of judicial or administrative authorities will be an important indication that the mark enjoys a reputation in the relevant territory, especially where such decisions are recent. 
Poleg tega so dokazi, iz katerih je razvidno, da je bil ugled znamke vložnika ugovora večkrat priznan in zaščiten pred kršitvami z odločbami pravosodnih ali upravnih organov, pomemben znak, da ima znamka ugled na upoštevnem ozemlju, zlasti če so to novejše odločbe.
That effect may be reinforced when there is a substantial number of decisions of this kind (on the probative value of decisions, see paragraph 3.1.4.4 below). 
Ta učinek se lahko še okrepi, če je takšnih odločb veliko (v zvezi z dokazno vrednostjo odločb glej odstavek 3.1.4.4 v nadaljevanju).
This factor is mentioned in Article 2(1)(b)(5) of WIPO's Joint Recommendation. 
Ta dejavnik je naveden v členu 2(1)(b)(5) skupnega priporočila organizacije WIPO.
Number of registrations 
Število registracij
The number and duration of registrations and applications for the mark around Europe or the world is also relevant, but is in itself a weak indication of the degree of recognition of the sign by the relevant public. 
Število in trajanje registracij in prijav za znamko v Evropi ali po svetu sta prav tako pomembna, vendar sta sama po sebi šibek znak stopnje prepoznavnosti znamke pri upoštevni javnosti.
The fact that the opponent has many trade mark registrations and in many classes may indirectly attest to the international circulation of the brand, but cannot decisively prove a reputation in itself. 
Dejstvo, da ima vložnik ugovora veliko registracij znamke v številnih razredih, lahko posredno potrdi mednarodno razširjenost znamke, vendar samo po sebi ni odločilni dokaz za ugled.
This factor is mentioned in Article 2(1)(b)(4) of the WIPO Joint Recommendation, where the need for actual use is made clear: the duration and geographical area of any registrations, and/or any applications for registration, of the mark are relevant ‘to the extent that they reflect use or recognition of the mark'. 
Ta dejavnik je naveden v členu 2(1)(b)(4) skupnega priporočila organizacije WIPO, v katerem je jasno poudarjena potreba po dejanski uporabi: trajanje in geografsko območje vseh registracij in/ali prijav za registracijo znamke sta pomembna glede na to, v kolikšnem obsegu izražata uporabo ali prepoznavnost znamke.
Certification and awards 
Certifikati in nagrade
Certification, awards, and similar public recognition instruments usually provide information about the history of the mark, or reveal certain quality aspects of the opponent's products, but as a rule they will not be sufficient in themselves to establish reputation and will be more useful as indirect indications. 
Certifikati, nagrade in podobni instrumenti javne prepoznavnosti navadno zagotavljajo informacije o preteklosti znamke ali razkrivajo nekatere vidike glede kakovosti izdelkov vložnika ugovora, vendar praviloma sami po sebi ne zadostujejo za opredelitev ugleda in so uporabnejši kot posredni znaki.
For example, the fact that the opponent has been a holder of a royal warrant for many years may perhaps show that the mark invoked is a traditional brand, but cannot give first-hand information about trade mark awareness. 
Na primer dejstvo, da je vložnik ugovora že več let imetnik kraljevega priznanja, lahko pokaže, da je znamka, za katero se uveljavljajo pravice, tradicionalna znamka, vendar ne more zagotoviti informacij o poznanosti znamke iz prve roke.
However, if the certification concerns facts that are related to the performance of the mark, its relevance will be much higher. 
Če pa se certifikat nanaša na dejstva, ki so povezana z uspešnostjo znamke, je njegov pomen veliko večji.
This factor is mentioned by the Court in Lloyd Schuhfabrik (Lloyd Schufabrik Meyer) and Chiemsee (Windsurfing Chiemsee) in relation to the assessment of enhanced distinctiveness through use. 
Ta dejavnik je Sodišče navedlo v sodbah v zadevah Lloyd Schuhfabrik (Lloyd Schuhfabrik Meyer) in Chiemsee (Windsurfing Chiemsee) v zvezi s presojo povečanega razlikovalnega učinka na podlagi uporabe.
The value associated with the mark 
Vrednost, povezana z znamko
The fact that a mark is solicited by third companies for reproduction on their products, either as a trade mark, or as mere decoration, is a strong indication that the mark possesses a high degree of attractiveness and an important economic value. 
Dejstvo, da tretje družbe zaprosijo za reprodukcijo znamke v zvezi s svojimi izdelki, ne glede na to, ali se to nanaša na znamko ali samo na dekoracijo, je pomemben znak, da je znamka zelo privlačna in ima pomembno tržno vrednost.
Therefore, the extent to which the mark is exploited through licensing, merchandising and sponsoring, as well as the scale of the respective schemes, are useful indications in assessing reputation. 
Zato sta obseg izkoriščanja znamke preko licenciranja, trženja in sponzoriranja ter obseg zadevnih programov koristna podatka pri presoji ugleda.
This factor is mentioned in Article 2(1)(b)(6) of the WIPO Joint Recommendation. 
Ta dejavnik je naveden v členu 2(1)(b)(6) skupnega priporočila organizacije WIPO.
3.1.4 Proof of reputation 
Dokaz o ugledu
3.1.4.1 Standard of proof 
Dokazni standard
The opponent must submit evidence enabling the Office to reach the positive conclusion that the earlier mark has acquired a reputation in the relevant territory. 
Vložnik ugovora mora predložiti dokaze, na podlagi katerih lahko Urad ugotovi, da je prejšnja znamka pridobila ugled na upoštevnem ozemlju.
The wording used in Article 8(5) EUTMR and Article 7(2)(f) EUTMDR is quite clear in this respect: the earlier mark deserves enlarged protection only if it ‘has a reputation'. 
Ubeseditev člena 8(5) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU in člena 7(2)(f) Delegirane uredbe je v zvezi s tem precej jasna: prejšnja znamka si zasluži razširjeno varstvo, samo če „uživa ugled“.
It follows that the evidence must be clear and convincing, in the sense that the opponent must clearly establish all the facts necessary to safely conclude that the mark is known by a significant part of the public. 
Iz tega sledi, da morajo biti dokazi jasni in prepričljivi, kar pomeni, da mora vložnik ugovora jasno zagotoviti vsa dejstva, ki so potrebna za zanesljivo ugotovitev, da je znamka znana znatnemu delu javnosti.
The reputation of the earlier mark must be established to the satisfaction of the Office and not merely assumed. 
Urad mora biti prepričan o ugledu prejšnje znamke in ne samo domnevati, da obstaja.
3.1.4.2 Burden of proof 
Dokazno breme
According to the second sentence of Article 95(1) EUTMR, in inter partes proceedings the Office is restricted in its examination to the facts, evidence and arguments provided by the parties. 
Urad je v skladu z drugim stavkom člena 95(1) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU v postopku inter partes pri svojem preizkusu omejen na dejstva, dokaze in navedbe, ki so jih zagotovile stranke.
It follows that, when assessing whether the earlier mark enjoys reputation, the Office may neither take into account facts known to it as a result of its own private knowledge of the market nor conduct an ex officio investigation, but should exclusively base its findings on the information and evidence submitted by the opponent. 
Iz tega sledi, da Urad pri presoji, ali ima prejšnja znamka ugled, ne sme upoštevati dejstev, ki so mu znana na podlagi lastnih podatkov o trgu, niti opraviti preiskave po uradni dolžnosti, ampak mora svoje ugotovitve utemeljiti izključno z informacijami in dokazi, ki jih je predložil vložnik ugovora.
Exceptions to this rule apply where particular facts are so well established that they can be considered as universally known and, thus, are also presumed to be known to the Office (e.g. the fact that a particular country has a certain number of consumers, or the fact that food products target the general public). 
Izjeme od tega pravila se uporabljajo, kadar so posamezna dejstva tako dobro znana, da se lahko štejejo za splošno znana, in se zato tudi domneva, da jih Urad pozna (npr. dejstvo, da ima neka država določeno število potrošnikov, ali dejstvo, da so živila namenjena splošni javnosti).
However, whether or not a mark has passed the threshold of reputation established by the Court in Chevy (General Motors) is not in itself a pure question of fact, since it requires the legal evaluation of several factual indications, and the reputation of the earlier mark may therefore not be simply assumed to be a universally known fact. 
Ali je znamka presegla prag ugleda, ki ga je Sodišče določilo v sodbi Chevy (General Motors), samo po sebi ni povsem dejansko vprašanje, saj zahteva pravno presojo več konkretnih podatkov, zaradi česar ni mogoče domnevati, da je ugled prejšnje znamke splošno znano dejstvo.
Article 7(2)(f) EUTMDR provides that the burden of putting forward and proving the relevant facts lies with the opponent, by expressly requiring it to provide evidence attesting that the earlier mark has a reputation for the goods and services claimed. 
Člen 7(2)(f) Delegirane uredbe določa, da mora vložnik ugovora predložiti in dokazati upoštevna dejstva, saj se izrecno zahteva, da mora zagotoviti dokaze o tem, da prejšnja znamka uživa ugled.
According to Article 7(1) and Article 7(2)(f) EUTMDR and Office practice, such evidence may be submitted either together with the notice of opposition, or subsequently within 4 months of the date of notification of the opposition to the applicant. 
Ti dokazi se lahko v skladu s členom 7(1) in členom 7(2)(f) Delegirane uredbe ter prakso Urada predložijo skupaj z ugovorom zoper registracijo ali naknadno v štirih mesecih od datuma obvestila o ugovoru, ki je poslano prijavitelju.
The opponent may also refer to facts and evidence submitted in the course of another opposition, provided that the relevant materials are indicated in a clear and unambiguous way and that the language of proceedings is the same in both cases. 
Vložnik ugovora se lahko sklicuje tudi na dejstva in dokaze, predložene v okviru drugega ugovora, če je zadevno gradivo označeno jasno in nedvoumno ter je jezik postopka v obeh primerih enak.
If the evidence of reputation is not in the correct language, the Office may, of its own motion or upon reasoned request by the other party, require the opponent to submit a translation of the evidence in that language, within a period specified by the Office (Article 7(3) EUTMDR and Article 24 EUTMIR). 
Če dokazi o ugledu niso v ustreznem jeziku, lahko Urad na lastno pobudo ali na utemeljeno zahtevo druge stranke od vložnika ugovora zahteva prevod dokaza v roku, ki ga določi Urad, v tem jeziku (člen 7(3) Delegirane uredbe in člen 24 Izvedbene uredbe).
It is left to the discretion of the Office whether the opponent has to submit a translation of the evidence of reputation into the language of the proceedings. 
Uradu je prepuščena presoja, ali mora vložnik ugovora predložiti prevod dokazov o ugledu v jezik postopka.
If the applicant explicitly requests a translation of the evidence in the language of the proceedings, the Office, in principle, will require a translation from the opponent. 
Če prijavitelj izrecno zahteva prevod dokazov v jezik postopka, bo Urad načeloma vložnika ugovora pozval k predložitvi prevoda.
However, a rejection of such a request is feasible where it appears that the applicant's request, in view of the self-explanatory character of the submitted evidence, is exaggerated or even abusive. 
Vendar je mogoče takšno zahtevo zavrniti, če se zdi, da je prijaviteljeva zahteva glede na zadostno jasnost predloženih dokazov pretirana ali da bi lahko celo pomenila zlorabo.
Where the Office requires a translation of the evidence, it will give the opponent a period of 2 months to submit it. 
Če Urad zahteva prevod dokazov, da vložniku ugovora na voljo dva meseca za predložitev prevoda.
In view of the volume of documents often needed for proving reputation, it may be sufficient to translate only the material parts of long documents or publications. 
Zaradi obsega dokumentov, ki so pogosto potrebni za dokazovanje ugleda, lahko zadostuje, če se prevedejo samo pomembni deli dolgih dokumentov ali publikacij.
As regards the structure and format in which written evidence of reputation must be filed, Article 55 EUTMDR applies, which provides that the documents or other items of evidence must be contained in annexes to a submission, which must be numbered consecutively. 
V zvezi s strukturo in formatom, v katerem je treba predložiti dokaze o ugledu, se uporablja člen 55 Delegirane uredbe, ki določa, da so dokumentacija ali drugi dokazi predloženi v prilogah k vlogam, ki so zaporedno oštevilčene.
Submissions must include an index indicating, for each document or item annexed thereto the following: 
Vloge morajo vsebovati kazalo, ki za vsak dokument ali priložen dokaz navaja:
1. the number of the annex; 
številko priloge;
2. a short description of the document or item, and if applicable, the number of pages; 
kratek opis dokumenta ali dokaza in, kjer je to potrebno, število strani;
3. the page number of the submission where the document or item is mentioned. 
številko strani vloge, kjer se na zadevni dokument ali dokaz sklicuje.
The opponent may also indicate, in the index of annexes, which specific parts of a document it relies upon in support of its arguments. 
Stranka, ki vlogo vloži, lahko v kazalu prilog navede tudi, na katere dele dokumenta opira svoje navedbe.
Pursuant to Article 55(3) EUTMDR, where the submissions or annexes do not comply with the requirements, the Office may invite the opponent to remedy any deficiency within a set time limit. 
Če vloga ali priloge ne izpolnjujejo pogojev, lahko Urad v skladu s členom 55(3) Delegirane uredbe stranko, ki vlogo vloži, pozove, naj pomanjkljivosti odpravi v roku, ki ji ga določi.