Please see the reply to question 8 above.

Yes.

In order to ensure protection of confidential information brought forward as evidence, the court may decide to exclude the public from the court hearings. The judge is obliged to warn all parties that they have to respect the confidential nature of any relevant information which they receive in such hearings (Code of Civil Procedure, Articles 307-310).

No specific procedures are prescribed in respect of Articles 51 and 52 of the TRIPS Agreement, and general rules of the Code of Execution are applied.

Please see the reply to question 13 above.

The court decides on the amount of security under the rule of reason.

The court, judging the merits of the case, decides who shall pay the cost of detentions. The cost of destruction is borne by the infringer, but may also be borne by the authority executing the destruction, depending on the case.

No judicial practice exists in this regard.

The amount of damages is adequate compensation. Criteria of the way for calculation are followed under general rules set out in Slovenia's response to question 5 of the Checklist of Issues on Enforcement.

For the calculation of the recovery of lost profits all the possibilities mentioned in the question are applicable. The calculation can be based therefore either on the right holder's lost profits, on the infringer's gained profits, or on the reasonable royalty under licence analogy. Which way will be chosen depends upon the plaintiff's claim(s) and his factual allegations, based on the submitted evidence.

International treaties which were ratified and officially published under Article 8 of the Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia are applicable directly and thus self-executing. This means that in Slovenia also the TRIPS Agreement is in principle applicable directly, provided that the relevant provision allows direct applicability, i.e. it has to be clear and complete. Current practice of the courts is in favour of direct applicability, as for example in the case of Article 50 of the TRIPS Agreement. There are two judgements related to patent cases, of the Court of Appeals in Ljubljana (Cgp 326/97 from 13 May 1997 and Cgp 552/97 from 12 June 1997), where the ruling was in favour of interlocutory injunctions under the conditions of Article 50.3 of the TRIPS Agreement. Therefore, there is in principle no divergence between the intellectual property legislation and practice, but if it appears, then international agreement prevails, as explicitly specified in the mentioned Article 8 of the Constitution.

The time extension of another ten working days pursuant to Article 55 of the TRIPS Agreement is not explicitly mentioned in the relevant legislation. However, since the TRIPS Agreement is directly applicable (see the answer to question 1 from Switzerland above), an applicant can make use of the extended term by directly referring to the mentioned provision of the TRIPS Agreement, which may be considered to be self-executing.

Any foreign party is entitled to initiate an enforcement procedure in the relevant courts. Any party may, even directly if it so wishes, initiate an enforcement procedure in the relevant courts.

No specific requirements are required for foreign parties who enjoy the same treatment as national persons and/or legal entities. Moreover, foreign parties who are unable to communicate in the Slovenian language are entitled to follow the procedure with the assistance of an interpreter, provided that the costs for interpretation are borne by that party (see Articles 102(2)(3) and 105 of the Code of Civil Procedure, Official Gazette No. 4/1979, 27/1990, 1/1991-I, 55/1992, 19/1994).

Abuse of procedural rights of parties is prohibited and can be subject to a fine (Code of Civil Procedure, Articles 10, 316). A party which abuses its procedural rights is liable to the other party for damages, which have to cover all the losses suffered (Code of Obligations, Article 190). This is explicitly regulated for any provisional measure that was sought, ordered and later found incorrect (Code of Execution, Article 274). The State and their officials can also be liable for damages caused by wilfully or negligently illegal acts of authorities (Code of Obligations, Article 172). These principles apply for both judicial and administrative procedures.

All the intellectual property cases have to be dealt with expeditiously, and thus have priority over other civil or commercial suits (Industrial Property Law, Article 98). A procedure in which a provisional measure is sought has to be treated urgently (Courts Act, Article 83). Deliberate delays caused by the parties can be prevented via several procedural safeguards – for instance summary judgement (Code of Civil Procedure, Article 332), fines for abuse of procedural rights (Code of Civil Procedure, Article 316), and many others.

The fee for filing a suit is one per cent of the stated value of the dispute in civil matters and two per cent in commercial matters, but not more than SIT 540 (currently approximately US$4 000). The fee of the same amount applies for filing an appeal against the final judgement. The fee for the application for provisional measures is up to SIT 15 300 (approximately US$120). No fee is charged for criminal complaints (see Law on Judicial Fees, which unfortunately was amended so often that it is almost impossible to provide a reasonably voluminous copy of it).

All judgements must be provided in writing, at the latest within eight days from the day when the court has decided. The decision is delivered to the parties and must involve the information on the right of appeal (see Article 337 of the Code of Civil Procedure). Each judgement must contain introduction, decision and full explanation of the findings (see Article 338 of Code of Civil Procedure).

The provision of Article 41.3 of the TRIPS Agreement is fully met by numerous provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, as this is generally the case in the continental legal system.

The provision of Article 42 of the TRIPS Agreement is fully met by the Code of Civil Procedure. Civil or commercial suit has to be submitted to the defending party in advance so that there is enough time to prepare the defence – at least eight days before the first oral hearing (Code of Civil Procedure, Articles 142, 286). These provisions are not applicable only when an ex parte provisional measure is ordered. In such cases the application and the order are served on the defendant at the beginning of the enforcement (Code of Execution, Article 39).