natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The Boards held that standard invoices containing the usual information (date, indication of seller's and buyer's name/address, product concerned, price paid) did not require a translation. 
Odbori za pritožbe so odločili, da standardnih računov, ki vsebujejo običajne informacije (datum, navedbo imena/naslova prodajalca in kupca, zadevni proizvod, plačano ceno), ni treba prevesti.
Even though the names of the addressees and the quantities sold were blacked out, the invoices nevertheless confirmed the sale of ‘CERATOSIL' products, measured in kilograms, to companies throughout the relevant territory during the relevant period. 
Čeprav so bili podatki o imenih naslovnikov in prodanih količinah zatemnjeni, je bila iz računov kljub temu razvidna prodaja proizvodov „CERATOSIL“, izražena v kilogramih, in sicer podjetjem z upoštevnega ozemlja v upoštevnem obdobju.
Together with the remaining evidence (brochures, affidavit, articles, photographs), this was considered sufficient to prove genuine use. 
Upoštevalo se je, da to skupaj s preostalimi dokazi (brošure, zaprisežena izjava, izdelki, fotografije) zadostuje za dokaz o resni in dejanski uporabi.
29/11/2010, B 1 477 670 The opponent, which was active in the field of vehicle maintenance and the management of businesses associated with buying and selling vehicles, provided several Annual Reports giving a general overview of its overall commercial and financial activities. 
29/11/2010, B 1 477 670 Vložnik ugovora, ki je bil dejaven na področju vzdrževanja vozil in vodenja podjetij, ki se ukvarjajo z nakupom in prodajo vozil, je predložil več letnih poročil, ki zagotavljajo splošen pregled njegovih skupnih poslovnih in finančnih dejavnosti.
The OD found that these reports, by themselves, did not provide sufficient information on actual use for the majority of services claimed. 
Oddelek za ugovore je ugotovil, da ta poročila kot taka ne zagotavljajo zadostnih informacij o dejanski uporabi za večino zadevnih storitev.
However, in conjunction with advertisements and publicity displaying the mark in question for particular services, the OD concluded that the evidence as a whole provided sufficient indications as to the scope, nature, period and place of use for these services. 
Vendar je sklenil, da v povezavi z oglasi in reklamami, v katerih je bila prikazana zadevna znamka za posebne storitve, dokazi kot celota zagotavljajo dovolj podatkov o obsegu, naravi, obdobju in kraju uporabe za te storitve.
29/11/2010, R 919/20094, GELITE / GEHOLIT The documents submitted by the appellant showed use of the trade mark for ‘coating materials based on artificial resin (base, intermediate and top coatings) and industrial lacquers'. 
29/11/2010, R 919/20094, GELITE / GEHOLIT Iz dokumentov, ki jih je predložil pritožnik, je razvidna uporaba blagovne znamke za premazne materiale na podlagi umetne smole (osnovni, vmesni in prekrivni premazi) ter industrijske lake in firneže.
The attached labels showed use of the trade mark for various base, primer and top coatings. 
Priložene etikete so dokazovale uporabo blagovne znamke za različne osnovne, temeljne in prekrivne premaze.
This information coincided with the attached price lists. 
Te informacije so bile skladne s priloženimi ceniki.
The associated technical information sheets described the goods as corrosion coatings based on artificial resin, which are offered for sale in various colours. 
V povezanih tehničnih listih je bilo to blago opisano kot protikorozijski premazi na podlagi umetne smole, ki se prodajajo v različnih barvah.
The attached invoices showed that these goods were supplied to various customers in Germany. 
Iz priloženih računov je bilo razvidno, da je bilo to blago dobavljeno različnim kupcem v Nemčiji.
Although the turnover figures stated in the written declaration in relation to the period from 2002 to 2007 did not expressly refer to Germany, it had to be concluded that they were obtained at least in part also in Germany. 
Čeprav se podatki o prometu iz pisne izjave za obdobje 2002-2007 niso nanašali izrecno na Nemčijo, je treba sklepati, da so bili vsaj deloma pridobljeni tudi v Nemčiji.
Consequently, the earlier mark was deemed to be used for the goods lacquer, lacquer paints, varnishes, paints; dispersions and emulsions to coat and repair surfaces because it was not possible to create any further subcategories for these goods. 
Zato se šteje, da se prejšnja znamka uporablja za blago laki, lakirne barve, firneži, barve; disperzije in emulzije za prekrivanje in obnovo površin, saj ni mogoče ustvariti dodatnih podkategorij za to blago.
20/04/2010, R 878/20092, SOLEA / Balea The solemn declaration refers to high sales figures (over EUR 100 million) for marked products from 2004 to 2006 and attaches internet extracts of pictures of the products sold during the relevant period (soap, shampoo, deodorant (for feet and body), lotions, and cleaning items). 
20/04/2010, R 878/20092, SOLEA / Balea Zaprisežena izjava se nanaša na podatke o velikem obsegu prodaje (nad 100 milijonov EUR) za označene proizvode v obdobju 2004-2006, priloženi pa so ji spletni izvlečki s slikami proizvodov, prodanih v upoštevnem obdobju (milo, šampon, dezodorant (za noge in telo), losjoni in čistilna sredstva).
Although the internet extracts bear a copyright date of 2008, the credibility of what the declaration affirms is reinforced by the judgment of the State Court of Mannheim, a copy of which had been adduced previously by the opponent in order to demonstrate the enhanced distinctiveness of the earlier mark and which referred to the market share enjoyed by products bearing the opponent's mark for ladies' face care products (6.2 %), caring lotions (6.3 %), shower soaps and shampoos (6.1 %) and men's face care and shaving products (7.9 %). 
Čeprav so na spletnih izvlečkih navedene avtorske pravice iz leta 2008, je verodostojnost navedb iz izjave podkrepljena s sodbo deželnega sodišča v Mannheimu, katere kopijo je vložnik ugovora pred tem predložil kot dokaz o povečanem razlikovalnem učinku prejšnje znamke; sodba se je sklicevala na tržni delež proizvodov, označenih z znamko vložnika ugovora, v zvezi z izdelki za nego obraza za ženske (6,2 %), negovalnimi losjoni (6,3 %), mili za prhanje in šamponi (6,1 %) ter izdelki za nego obraza za moške in izdelki za britje (7,9 %).
Moreover, the judgment states that, according to a GfK study, one fifth of German citizens purchase at least one BALEA product per annum. 
V sodbi je poleg tega navedeno, da v skladu z ugotovitvami študije GfK petina nemških državljanov kupi vsaj en izdelek BALEA na leto.
Reference is also made to two further studies that demonstrate that the brand is well known in Germany. 
Sodba se sklicuje tudi na dve dodatni študiji, ki dokazujeta, da je znamka v Nemčiji znana.
Thus, proof of use for the mark has been demonstrated sufficiently for the products on which the opposition is based. 
Zato je bila zadostno dokazana uporaba znamke za proizvode, na katerih temelji ugovor.
The evidence provided to substantiate use of the earlier Danish trade mark appears to be sufficient. 
Dokazi, predloženi za utemeljitev uporabe prejšnje danske blagovne znamke, se zdijo zadostni.
The Board is satisfied that the invoice provided shows place and time of use, as it proves the sale to a Danish company of 2 200 cartons of products within the relevant date. 
Odbor za pritožbe je zadovoljen, da predloženi račun, iz katerega sta razvidna kraj in čas uporabe, dokazuje prodajo 2 200 kartonskih škatel proizvoda danskemu podjetju v upoštevnem obdobju.
The labels submitted show use on soft drinks bearing the mark as represented on the registration certificate. 
Predložene etikete dokazujejo uporabo na brezalkoholnih pijačah, označenih z znamko, kot je bila prikazana na potrdilu o registraciji.
As to the question whether proof consisting of one single invoice is sufficient in terms of extent of use, the content of that invoice, in the context of the remaining pieces of evidence, serves, in the Board's view, to conclude that the use made of the mark in Denmark is sufficient and genuine in connection with aerated water, aerated water with fruit taste and soda water. 
Odbor za pritožbe v zvezi z vprašanjem, ali za obseg uporabe zadostuje dokaz, ki vključuje samo en račun, meni, da je mogoče na podlagi vsebine navedenega računa v okviru preostalih dokazov sklepati, da je uporaba znamke na Danskem za gazirano vodo, gazirano vodo z okusom sadja in sodavico zadostna, resna in dejanska.
18/01/2011, T382/08, Vogue, EU:T:2011:9 The opponent submitted a declaration from the opponent's managing partner and 15 footwear manufacturers that footwear had been produced for the opponent under the trade mark VOGUE over a number of years, 35 photographs of VOGUE footwear models, photographs of stores and 670 invoices issued to the opponent by footwear manufacturers. 
18/01/2011, T382/08, Vogue, EU:T:2011:9 Vložnik ugovora je predložil izjavo svojega izvršnega direktorja in 15 proizvajalcev obutve, da se je za vložnika ugovora več let proizvajala obutev pod blagovno znamko VOGUE, 35 fotografij modelov obutve VOGUE, fotografije prodajaln in 670 računov, ki so jih vložniku ugovora izdali proizvajalci obutve.
The Court held that the declarations did not provide sufficient evidence concerning the extent, place and time of use. 
Sodišče je menilo, da izjave niso zagotovile zadostnih dokazov o obsegu, kraju in času uporabe.
The invoices concerned the sale of footwear to the opponent, not the sale of footwear to end consumers and, therefore, were not suitable for proving external use. 
Računi so se nanašali na prodajo obutve vložniku ugovora, in ne na prodajo obutve končnim potrošnikom, zato niso ustrezni za dokazovanje zunanje uporabe.
Mere presumptions and suppositions (‘highly unlikely', ‘unreasonable to think', ‘… which probably explains the absence of invoices …', ‘reasonable to assume', etc.) cannot replace solid evidence. 
Zgolj domneve in predpostavke („zelo malo verjetno“, „nerazumno sklepati“, „[…] kar verjetno pojasnjuje odsotnost računov […]“, „razumno domnevati“ itd.) ne morejo nadomestiti trdnih dokazov.
Therefore, genuine use was denied. 
Zato je bila resna in dejanska uporaba zavrnjena.
19/09/2007, 1359 C; confirmed 09/09/2008, R 1764/20074, PAN AM II The owner of the mark owned a US-based airline, operating solely in the US. 
19/09/2007, 1359 C; potrjena 09/09/2008, R 1764/20074, PAN AM II Imetnik blagovne znamke je bil lastnik letalske družbe s sedežem v ZDA, ki posluje izključno v ZDA.
The fact that flights could also be booked via internet from the European Union could not alter the fact that the actual services of transportation (Class 39) were rendered exclusively outside the relevant territory. 
Dejstvo, da je bilo mogoče lete rezervirati prek spleta iz Evropske unije, ne spremeni dejstva, da so se dejanske prevozniške storitve (razred 39) opravljale izključno zunaj upoštevnega ozemlja.
Furthermore, the lists submitted of passengers with addresses in the European Union could not prove that the flights had actually been booked from Europe. 
Poleg tega iz predloženih seznamov potnikov z naslovi v Evropski uniji ni bilo razvidno, da so bili leti dejansko rezervirani iz Evrope.
Finally, the website was exclusively written in English, the prices were in US dollars and the relevant telephone and fax numbers were from within the US. 
Nazadnje, spletišče je bilo izključno v angleškem jeziku, cene so bile navedene v ameriških dolarjih, pa tudi ustrezna telefonska številka in številka telefaksa sta bili ameriški.
Therefore, genuine use in the relevant territory was denied. 
Zato je bila resna in dejanska uporaba na upoštevnem ozemlju zavrnjena.
04/05/2010, R 966/20092, COAST / GREEN COAST (fig.) et al. There are no special circumstances that might justify a finding that the catalogues submitted by the opponent, on their own or in combination with the website and magazine extracts, prove the extent of use of any of the earlier signs for any of the G&S involved. 
04/05/2010, R 966/20092, COAST / GREEN COAST (fig.) et al. Ne obstajajo nikakršne posebne okoliščine, na podlagi katerih bi bilo mogoče ugotoviti, da katalogi, ki jih je predložil vložnik ugovora, sami ali v kombinaciji s spletiščem in odlomki iz revij dokazujejo obseg uporabe katerega koli od prejšnjih znakov za zadevno blago in storitve.
Although the evidence submitted shows use of the earlier sign in connection with clothing for men and women, the opponent did not produce any evidence whatsoever indicating the commercial volume of the exploitation of this sign to show that such use was genuine. 
Čeprav je iz predloženih dokazov razvidna uporaba prejšnjega znaka za oblačila za moške in ženske, vložnik ugovora ni predložil nikakršnih dokazov o tržnem obsegu izkoriščanja tega znaka, ki bi pokazali, da je bila takšna uporaba resna in dejanska.
08/06/2010, R 1076/20092, EURO CERT (fig.)/ EUROCERT It is well established in the case-law that a declaration, even if sworn or affirmed in accordance with the law under which it is rendered, must be corroborated by independent evidence. 
08/06/2010, R 1076/20092, EURO CERT (fig.)/ EUROCERT Ustaljena sodna praksa je, da mora biti izjava, tudi če je zaprisežena ali overjena v skladu z zakonodajo, na podlagi katere je izdana, podprta z neodvisnimi dokazi.
The declaration in this case, drawn up by an employee of the opponent's company, contains an outline of the nature of the relevant services, but only general statements concerning trade activities. 
V tem primeru izjava, ki jo je sestavil zaposleni v podjetju vložnika ugovora, vsebuje opis vrste upoštevnih storitev, vendar le splošne izjave o trgovinskih dejavnostih.
It contains no detailed sales or advertising figures or other data that might show the extent and use of the mark. 
Ne vključuje nikakršnih podrobnih podatkov o prodaji ali oglaševanju ali drugih podatkov, ki bi lahko kazali obseg in uporabo blagovne znamke.
Furthermore, a mere three invoices with important financial data blanked out and a list of clients can hardly be considered corroborative evidence. 
Poleg tega le treh računov z zatemnjenimi pomembnimi finančnimi podatki in seznama strank ni mogoče šteti za potrditvene dokaze.
Therefore, no genuine use of the earlier mark has been demonstrated. 
Zato resna in dejanska uporaba prejšnje blagovne znamke ni bila dokazana.
The spreadsheets with turnover figures and the Analysis and Review reports concerning sales figures are documents drawn up by or commissioned by the appellant itself and, therefore, have less probative value. 
Ker so preglednice s podatki o prometu ter poročili o analizi in pregledu glede podatkov o prodaji dokumenti, ki jih je pripravil ali naročil sam pritožnik, imajo manjšo dokazno vrednost.
None of the evidence submitted contains any clear indication concerning the place of use of the earlier mark. 
Nobeno od predloženih dokazov ne vsebuje jasne navedbe o kraju uporabe prejšnje znamke.
The spreadsheets and the Analysis and Review Reports, which contain data compiled on the total value of estimated sales (in SEK) between the years 2003 to 2007, contain no information on where the sales took place. 
Preglednice ter poročili o analizi in pregledu, ki vsebujejo zbrane podatke o skupni vrednosti ocenjene prodaje (v SEK) med letoma 2003 in 2007, ne vključujejo nobenih informacij, kje je potekala prodaja.
There is no reference to the territory of the European Union, where the earlier trade mark is registered. 
V njih ni sklicevanja na ozemlje Evropske unije, na katerem je registrirana prejšnja blagovna znamka.
The invoices do not cover any sales of goods made by the appellant. 
Računi ne zajemajo nobene prodaje blaga, ki jo je opravil pritožnik.
Therefore, the evidence submitted is clearly insufficient to prove genuine use of the earlier mark. 
Zato predloženi dokazi očitno ne zadostujejo za dokaz o resni in dejanski uporabi prejšnje znamke.
12/12/2002, T39/01, HIWATT, EU:T:2002:316 A catalogue showing the mark on three different models of amplifiers (but not indicating place, time or extent), a catalogue of the Frankfurt International trade fair showing that a company called HIWATT Amplification International exhibited at that fair (but not indicating any use of the trade mark) and a copy of the 1997 HIWATT Amplification Catalogue showing the mark on different models of amplifiers (but not indicating place or extent of use) were not considered sufficient to prove genuine use, principally because of lack of extent of use. 
12/12/2002, T39/01, HIWATT, EU:T:2002:316 Upoštevalo se je, da katalog, v katerem je prikazana blagovna znamka na treh modelih ojačevalnikov (vendar brez navedbe kraja, časa ali obsega uporabe), katalog z mednarodnega sejma v Frankfurtu, iz katerega je razvidno, da je podjetje HIWATT Amplification International razstavljalo na navedenem sejmu (vendar v njem ni navedena nikakršna uporaba blagovne znamke), in kopija kataloga HIWATT Amplification iz leta 1997, v katerem je prikazana znamka na različnih modelih ojačevalnikov (vendar brez navedbe kraja, časa ali obsega uporabe), ne zadostujejo za dokaz o resni in dejanski uporabi, predvsem zato, ker v njih ni naveden obseg uporabe.
Member State Relevant legal provisions Quotation of the relevant legal provisions Summary / Comments 
Država članica Upoštevne pravne določbe Navedek iz ustreznih pravnih določb Povzetek/pripombe
Austria Article 33a(1) AT-TML … registered for a minimum of five years where it has not been used … in Austria during the five years preceding submission of the request. 
Avstrija Člen 33a(1) avstrijskega zakona o blagovnih znamkah […] registrirana najmanj pet let, če se ni uporabljala […] v Avstriji v petih letih pred predložitvijo zahteve.
Date of entry in the Register of trade marks. 
Datum vpisa v register blagovnih znamk.
Benelux Article 2.26(2)(a) BCIP … insofar as no normal use has been made of the mark on the Benelux territory for the goods for which the mark is registered, without valid reason, during an uninterrupted period of five years. 
Beneluks Člen 2.26(2)(a) Beneluške konvencije o intelektualni lastnini […] če se blagovna znamka na ozemlju Beneluksa ni običajno uporabljala za blago, za katero je registrirana, in sicer brez upravičenega razloga v neprekinjenem petletnem obdobju.
Date of registration of the trade mark. 
Datum registracije blagovne znamke.
Bulgaria Article 19(1) BG-TML ... within a period of five years following registration … Date of registration of the trade mark. 
Bolgarija Člen 19(1) bolgarskega zakona o blagovnih znamkah […] v petletnem obdobju po registraciji […] Datum registracije blagovne znamke.
Croatia Article 29(2) HR-TMA … the earlier trade mark has, on the date of publication of the application for the registration of the trade mark, been registered for not less than five years. 
Hrvaška Člen 29(2) hrvaškega zakona o blagovnih znamkah […] prejšnja blagovna znamka je bila na datum objave prijave za registracijo blagovne znamke registrirana najmanj pet let.
Cyprus Section 28A CY-TML If, within a period of five years from the date of entry of the mark in the Register of trade marks, the proprietor has not put the mark to genuine use in connection with the goods and services [...] in respect of which it is registered … Date of entry of the mark in the Register of Trade Marks. 
Ciper Člen 28A ciprskega zakona o blagovnih znamkah Če v petletnem obdobju od datuma vpisa blagovne znamke v register blagovnih znamk imetnik znamke ni resno ali dejansko uporabljal za blago in storitve […], za katere je registrirana […] Datum vpisa znamke v register blagovnih znamk.
Czech Republic Section 13(1) CZ-TML ... five years following the registration, the proprietor of the trade mark has not put the trade mark to genuine use… Date of entry of the mark in the Register of Trade Marks. 
Češka Člen 13(1) češkega zakona o blagovnih znamkah […] imetnik blagovne znamke v petih letih po registraciji blagovne znamke ni resno in dejansko uporabljal […] Datum vpisa znamke v register blagovnih znamk.
NB: the relevant date of entry in the Register is shown on the extracts from the official database of the CZ Office under INID code 151 (registration date). 
Opomba: zadevni datum vpisa v register je naveden v izpisih iz uradne podatkovne zbirke češkega urada pod kodo INID 151 (datum registracije).
Denmark Paragraph 25(1) DK-TML … Within a period of five years following the date of the termination of the registration procedure [when] the proprietor […] has not put the trade mark to genuine use […], or if such use has been suspended during an uninterrupted period of five years […] unless there are proper reasons for non-use. 
Danska Člen 25(1) danskega zakona o blagovnih znamkah […] v petletnem obdobju po datumu zaključka postopka registracije, [če] imetnik […] blagovne znamke ni resno in dejansko uporabljal […], ali če je bila takšna uporaba prekinjena v neprekinjenem petletnem obdobju […], razen če obstajajo upravičeni razlogi za neuporabo.
Where no opposition has been lodged: 2 months after publication of the registration (post-registration opposition procedure). 
Če ni bil vložen ugovor: dva meseca po objavi registracije (postopek ugovora po registraciji).
Finland Section 26 FI-TML Section 20 FI-FML … if the trade mark has not been used for the last five years …the registering authority shall enter the trade mark in the register and give public notice thereof. 
Finska Člen 26 finskega zakona o blagovnih znamkah Člen 20 finskega zakona o blagovnih znamkah […] če se blagovna znamka v zadnjih petih letih ni uporabljala, […] registracijski organ vpiše blagovno znamko v register in to javno objavi.
Any opposition to the registration of the trade mark shall be filed in writing with the registering authority within 2 months of the date of the public notice. 
Ugovori zoper registracijo blagovne znamke se vložijo pisno pri registracijskem organu v dveh mesecih od datuma javne objave.
Where no opposition has been lodged: date of registration (post registration opposition procedure). 
Če ni bil vložen ugovor: datum registracije (postopek ugovora po registraciji).
Where opposition has been lodged: date of closure of the opposition proceedings (i.e. final refusal of the opposition or disposal otherwise, e.g. by withdrawal of the opposition). 
Če je bil vložen ugovor: datum zaključka postopka ugovora (tj. dokončne zavrnitve ugovora ali katerega drugega dejanja, npr. umika ugovora).
France Article L. 714-5 FR-IP CODE … use during an uninterrupted period of five years. 
Francija Člen L. 714-5 francoskega zakonika o intelektualni lastnini […] uporaba v neprekinjenem obdobju petih let.
Date of publication of the registration in the ‘Bulletin official de la propriété industrielle'. 
Datum objave registracije v „Bulletin officiel de la propriété industrielle“.
Germany Section 26(5) DE-TML Insofar as use within five years from the point in time of the registration is necessary, in cases in which an opposition has been lodged against the registration, the time of the registration shall be substituted by the point in time of the conclusion of the opposition proceedings. 
Nemčija Člen 26(5) nemškega zakona o blagovnih znamkah Če se zahteva uporaba v petih letih od trenutka registracije, se v primeru vloženega ugovora zoper registracijo trenutek registracije nadomesti s trenutkom zaključka postopka ugovora.
Where an opposition has been lodged: date of closure of the opposition proceedings (i.e. final refusal of the opposition or disposal otherwise, e.g. by withdrawal of the opposition). 
Če je bil vložen ugovor: datum zaključka postopka ugovora (tj. dokončne zavrnitve ugovora ali katerega drugega dejanja, npr. umika ugovora).
Greece Article 147(2) read jointly with Article 143(1) GR-TML Article 160(1)(a) GR-TML Once the decision accepting the TM is final, the filing date constitutes the registration date. 
Grčija Člen 147(2) v povezavi s členom 143(1) grškega zakona o blagovnih znamkah Člen 160(1)(a) grškega zakona o blagovnih znamkah Ko odločba o sprejetju blagovne znamke postane dokončna, datum vložitve pomeni datum registracije.
The mark is revoked if it is not used within five years from the registration …' Date of filing the application. 
Blagovna znamka se razveljavi, če se ne uporablja v petih letih od registracije […] Datum vložitve prijave.