natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The opponent therefore has to submit registration certificates, etc. or rely on online evidence as set out above. 
Vložnik ugovora mora zato predložiti potrdila o registraciji itd., ali se sklicevati na spletne dokaze, kot je navedeno zgoraj.
In order to make its case under Article 8(5) EUTMR, the opponent has to submit evidence of reputation. 
Da bi se vložnik ugovora lahko skliceval na člen 8(5) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU, mora predložiti dokaze o ugledu.
In addition, the opponent has either to allege and demonstrate that use of the mark that is the subject matter of the contested EUTM application would take unfair advantage of, or be detrimental to, the distinctive character or the repute of the earlier trade mark, or to indicate that this is probable in the ordinary course of events. 
Poleg tega mora bodisi trditi in dokazati, da bi uporaba znamke, ki je predmet izpodbijane prijave blagovne znamke EU, neupravičeno izkoristila ali oškodovala razlikovalni značaj ali ugled prejšnje blagovne znamke, bodisi navesti, da bi se to verjetno zgodilo pri običajnem poteku dogodkov.
4.2.4.3 Non-registered trade mark or another sign used in the course of trade 
Neregistrirana blagovna znamka ali drug znak, ki se uporablja v gospodarskem prometu
Article 7(3) EUTMDR 
Člen 7(3) Delegirane uredbe
For these rights, the Office applies the protection provided by the relevant law. 
Urad za te pravice uporablja varstvo, določeno z zadevnim pravom.
Thus, when the relevant law requires these rights to be registered for protection, copies of the registration and, if applicable, documents such as renewal certificates are required. 
Če se v skladu z zadevnim pravom zahteva, da so te pravice registrirane za varstvo, je treba predložiti kopije registracije in, če je ustrezno, dokumente, kot so potrdila o podaljšanju.
In the case of non-registered marks or signs, the opponent must submit evidence of acquisition of the earlier right. 
Vložnik ugovora mora v primeru neregistriranih znamk ali znakov predložiti dokaze o pridobitvi prejšnje pravice.
It must further show that it may prohibit the use of a subsequent trade mark. 
Dokazati mora tudi, da lahko prepove uporabo poznejše blagovne znamke.
Furthermore, it also needs to provide a reference to and the wording of the provisions of the national law on which it bases its case by adducing official publications of the relevant provisions or jurisprudence, and to make out its case under that law. 
Poleg tega mora predložiti sklicevanje na določbe nacionalnega prava, na katerih je utemeljil svoj ugovor, in besedilo teh določb, in sicer z navedbo uradnih publikacij zadevnih določb ali sodne prakse, ter utemeljiti svoje argumente na navedenem pravu.
Where the evidence concerning the filing or registration of the sign claimed or the evidence concerning the content of the relevant national law is accessible online from a source recognised by the Office, the opponent may provide such evidence by making a reference to that source. 
Če so dokazi o vložitvi prijave ali registraciji zahtevanega znaka 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.
For that purpose, all online official publications and national databases will be accepted 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 bodo sprejete vse spletne uradne publikacije in nacionalne podatkovne zbirke, kolikor izvirajo od vladnega ali uradnega organa zadevne države članice, in sicer če so javno dostopne in brezplačne.
For cases where the provisions of national law are governed by common law rules, the acceptable source may include online official publications (jurisprudence). 
Kadar so določbe nacionalnega prava urejene s pravili občega prava, lahko sprejemljivi viri primerov vključujejo spletne uradne publikacije (sodno prakso).
Finally, the opponent must submit evidence that the use of its right, either registered or not, has been of more than mere local significance. 
Nazadnje, vložnik ugovora mora predložiti dokaze, da je uporaba njegove pravice, registrirane ali ne, več kot le lokalnega pomena.
See the Guidelines, Part C, Opposition, Section 4, Rights under Articles 8(4) and 8(6) EUTMR. 
Glej tudi Smernice, del C: Ugovor, razdelek 4: Pravice na podlagi člena 8(4) in (6) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU.
4.2.4.4 Protected designations of origin, protected geographical indications 
Zaščitene označbe porekla, zaščitene geografske označbe
Article 8(6) EUTMR 
Člen 8(6) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU
Article 7(2)(e) EUTMDR 
Člen 7(2)(e) Delegirane uredbe
Under Article 8(6) EUTMR, protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications applied for prior to the date of application of the EUTM (or the date of priority claimed, if applicable) can be invoked as the basis for oppositions. 
V skladu s členom 8(6) Uredbe o blagovni znamki EU je mogoče zaščitene označbe porekla in zaščitene geografske označbe, za katere je bila prijava vložena pred datumom prijave blagovne znamke EU (ali datumom zahtevane prednostne pravice, če je ustrezno), uporabiti kot podlago za ugovor.
For these rights, the Office applies the protection provided by the relevant European Union legislation or national law. 
Urad za te pravice uporablja varstvo, zagotovljeno z zadevno zakonodajo Evropske unije ali nacionalnim pravom.
In order to substantiate these rights, the opponent must provide the Office with evidence of the existence, validity and scope of protection of the earlier right. 
Vložnik ugovora mora za utemeljitev teh pravic Uradu predložiti dokaze o obstoju, veljavnosti in obsegu varstva prejšnje pravice.
To prove the existence, validity and scope of protection of the earlier right, the opponent must submit pertinent documents emanating from the competent authority proving that the right in question has been applied for, registered or granted (if the protected designation of origin or protected geographical indication was granted through administrative means other than registration). 
Da vložnik ugovora dokaže obstoj, veljavnost in obseg varstva prejšnje pravice, mora predložiti zadevne dokumente, ki jih je izdal pristojni organ in ki dokazujejo, da je bila zadevna pravica prijavljena, registrirana ali podeljena (če je bila zaščitena označba porekla ali zaščitena geografska označba podeljena na podlagi upravnih postopkov, ki niso registracija).
If these documents do not provide sufficient information regarding the opponent's entitlement to file the opposition, further documents must be submitted. 
Če ti dokumenti ne zagotavljajo dovolj informacij v zvezi z upravičenostjo vložnika ugovora do vložitve ugovora, je treba predložiti dodatne dokumente.
Furthermore, to prove that it is entitled to prohibit use of a subsequent trade mark under the relevant law, the opponent must provide a reference to and the wording of any national law on which it bases its case. 
Da vložnik ugovora poleg tega dokaže, da lahko v skladu z zadevnim pravom prepove uporabo poznejše blagovne znamke, mora predložiti sklicevanje na nacionalno pravo, na katerem je utemeljil svoj ugovor, in besedilo tega prava.
The wording is not required if the opposition is based on European Union legislation. 
Besedila ni treba predložiti, če ugovor temelji na zakonodaji Evropske unije.
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?