See reply to question no. 14 above.

See reply to question no. 14 above.

See reply to question no. 14 above.

See reply to question no. 14 above.

See reply to question no. 14 above.

See reply to question no. 14 above.

See reply to question no. 14 above.

In the beginning it might be useful to mention that in the Slovak Republic the judicial system is composed of three levels – three instances. The first instance is represented by district courts courts of general jurisdiction. Then there is the second instance, consisting of county courts that function as appellate courts, and the last resort is represented by the supreme court, whose task is to reach decisions mainly in matters of extraordinary remedies. In some specified cases of commercial and criminal law, county courts act as first instance courts and the role of the appellate court is then passed to the supreme court. Slovak courts and judiciary are fully independent. This means that all the judges are bound only by their consciousness and valid law. The jurist opinion of courts of higher instance is obligatory to courts of lower instance only with respect to a particular case. Despite that, there exists predominantly an informal system of precedence which is customarily applied to all cases, granting that decisions of the supreme court (primarily those generalising and representative) are officially published and widely respected. In appellate proceedings (judicial reviews) the relevant court of higher instance is able either to modify or to confirm the sentence or, if the sentence is found inadequate, to suspend it altogether and remit the case to the respective court of lower instance. The regulations concerning civil procedures are provided for by the Slovak Code of Civil Procedure, Act No. 99/1963, Digest of Laws, in accordance with the wording of later regulations. Requirements that need to be complied with if a party intends to file an action are relatively simple. The party wishing to file an action has only to supply the following information in his or her formal written request: identification of the parties involved in the enforcement procedure to be initiated, the merits of the case, the evidence proposed and the proposal for the court regarding the desirable kind of decision it should reach. Pursuant to Section 80 (b) and (c) of the Slovak Code of Civil Procedure, in filing a legal action the party is able to require the court to decide primarily whether the duty established by the law is complied within a legal relationship or in any violation of the law. The court could also determine whether there is any legal relationship or right at all given that there is an urgent valuable interest concerning this question. A party to an enforcement proceeding is thus entitled to ask the court to reach a decision in any of the ways corresponding to all the relevant criteria cited. In practice this means that courts decide on matters of damage payments, of adequate compensation for a non proprietary injury, which may also come in the form of financial compensation. Courts are authorised to order or forbid certain actions. Courts also decide on the existence or non existence of a right or legal relationship, given that there is a valuable interest concerning such a decision. Representation of a party by his or her counsel is not mandatory in trial proceedings, and legal fees account for 4% of the recoverable debt, the maximum amount being set as Sk 100 000, in commercial cases as Sk 500 000. There are several situations in which county courts function as first instance courts, namely in the following cases: enforcement of tradename rights, trademark rights and label of origin rights, then in matters of legal relationship concerning competition protection, unfair competition, patent rights, protected layout-designs and industrial designs and topography of semiconductor products as a subject of trade. The same applies to relationships resulting from copyright and related rights. In such cases the supreme court functions as an appellate court. Formal requirements necessary for appealing against a sentence are more or less identical with those of filing an action. The structure of courts and their interrelationships are established by the Act on Courts and Judiciary No. 335/1991, Digest of Laws, in accordance with the wording of later regulations. The jurisdiction of courts concerning cases and localities as well as functions is established by the already cited Slovak Code of Civil Procedure. In the field of patent protection, there is the central administrative authority the Slovak Industrial Property Office ("SIPO"), which keeps the registers of separate subjects of industrial property, makes decisions regarding the entry or the cancellation in the registers, the annulment of the patent in the registers, changes in registers and the relevant agenda. The decision of SIPO can be, after all proper remedies of administrative proceedings have been exhausted, submitted to a court, if there is a formal request, and the court will review the decision’s legality. Decisions of SIPO can be reviewed by the supreme court. Aside from all the standard procedures of legal proceedings, in enforcement of rights, if there is a case of emergency, a request can be applied to obtain preliminary measures, pursuant to Section 74 and the following provisions of the Slovak Code of Civil Procedure. Pursuant to Section 76, paragraph 1, letters d), e) and f), through preliminary measures the court is authorised primarily to order a party to pay a security or to deposit an object in court, to do something, to abstain from something, or to bear something, or the court is able to forbid a party to use certain things or rights. Preliminary measures represent from a procedural point of view a considerably simplified and rapid action, allowing the court to omit hearing the parties in person, but on the other hand binding it to reach a decision within the set period of one month, starting from the day the respective action has been filed. Preliminary measures can be enforced immediately, regardless of any contingent appeal against them, however, their effect is limited temporarily and also by their content, since they should not substitute a proper decision on the merits of the case and their effect is in principle bound to filing a proper legal action subsequently, within a proper time period determined by the court. As soon as a proper decision on the merits of the case is reached, the effect of the preliminary measures ceases by law. Otherwise it can cease when the time period determined by the court is over, or if the party does not comply with his or her obligation and fails to file a proper legal action regarding the case.

Damages payment or adequate compensation for non proprietary injury concerning the subject of industrial property falls within the jurisdiction of county courts. The same applies to copyright and related rights. Damage payment in general is regulated by Section 420 and the following provisions of the Civil Code. Certain specialized laws also relate to this regulation, like for example Section 26 of the Act on Trademarks, which aside from payment of damages also establishes the right to adequate compensation for non proprietary injury, granting that this compensation can also be submitted in the form of financial remuneration. In the case of inventions and industrial designs, the relevant regulations are stated in Section 75 of the Act No. 527/1990, Digest of Laws. Above all the injured party has the obligations to substantiate his or her claim for damage, calculate the payment and state who is responsible for the injury. Here it is necessary to mention that in the Slovak Republic there has been a system of authorised experts functioning for a long time, granting that these experts are called to provide their expert’s opinion in certain specific areas.

The court will decide on the right to compensation for legal fees along with its decision on the merits. The right to legal fees payment is regulated by Section 137 and following of the Slovak Code of Civil Procedure. Pursuant to Section 142 of the Slovak Code of Civil Procedure, the party with full success in the action, will be granted by the court compensation for all legal fees necessary to enforce the law or to defend the law efficiently against the party who was not successful. In the case of partial success, the court will distribute the payments appropriately or will decide that the parties are not entitled to compensation for legal fees. The successful party is thus able to enforce the right to compensation for all fees that were demonstrably used to gain effective law enforcement or defence, against the opposing party. These fees also include personal expenses, expenses for expert opinions, attorney’s charges, legal fees, and so on. An analogous regulation can be found also in the Act on Administrative Proceedings.

Damages payment or adequate compensation for non proprietary injury concerning the subject of industrial property falls within the jurisdiction of county courts. The same applies to copyright and related rights. Damage payment in general is regulated by Section 420 and following of the Civil Code. Certain specialized laws also relate to this regulation, like for example Section 26 of the Act on Trademarks, which aside from payment of damages also establishes the right to adequate compensation for non proprietary injury, granting that this compensation can be submitted also in the form of financial remuneration. In the case of inventions and industrial designs, the relevant regulations are stated in Section 75 of Act No. 527/1990, Digest of Laws. Above all the injured party has the obligations to substantiate his or her claim for damage, calculate the payment and state, who is responsible for the injury. Here it is necessary to mention, that in the Slovak Republic there has been a system of authorised experts functioning for a long time, granting that these experts are called to provide their expert’s opinion in certain specific areas. The court will decide on the right to compensation for legal fees along with its decision on the merits. The right to legal fees payment is regulated by Section 137 and following of the Slovak Code of Civil Procedure. Pursuant to Section 142 of the Slovak Code of Civil Procedure, the party with full success in the action, will be granted by the court compensation for all legal fees necessary to enforce the law or to defend the law efficiently against the party who was not successful. In the case of partial success, the court will distribute the payments appropriately or will decide that the parties are not entitled to compensation for legal fees. The successful party is thus able to enforce the right to compensation for all fees that were demonstrably used to gain effective law enforcement or defence, against the opposing party. These also fees include personal expenses, expenses for expert opinions, attorney’s charges, legal fees, and so on. An analogous regulation can be found also in the Act on Administrative Proceedings. The legal regulation does not include the notion of appropriate compensation. Compensation for injury can be established only by means of claim for damage. This, however, is possible only in case the applicant acted unlawfully or contra bonos mores, or in case he or she was engaged in unfair competition involving discrediting, in accordance with the wording of Section 50, the Commercial Code. By discrediting is to be understood any action through which a competitor provides or spreads false information about the situation, products and achievements of another competitor, if the information is able to cause any injury to another competitor. In case the action of the applicant could not be found unlawful or contra bonos mores, the enforcement of compensation would be difficult, since no damage in the legal sense occurred. In this particular case the law of the Slovak Republic does not correspond sufficiently with the TRIPS Agreement. The statistical data on the extent of the damages estimated by courts since 1 January 1996 is not available.

The required statistical data is not available directly in the Office. The Office has asked the Ministry of Justice and the Central Customs Administration for the provision of the above-mentioned information. In order to answer the question regarding the criminal aspects of intellectual property protection it would be best to quote the concrete provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, Sections 150 through 152. Section 150 Infringement of the rights to a trademark, trade name and protected appellation of origin (1) The person who has put on the market products or provided services marked with a mark identical to a trademark, the exclusive right for which belongs to another person, or a sign confusingly similar to this trademark, is punished by imprisonment for the period of one year, or by a monetary fine, or forfeiture of a thing. (2) Equal punishment is imposed on a person who in order to achieve economic benefit: (a) unlawfully uses a trade name or whatever sign confusingly similar with this name, or (b) puts into circulation products unlawfully marked with an appellation of origin to which the exclusive right belongs to another person, or with an appellation of origin confusingly similar. Section 151 Infringement of industrial rights The person who unlawfully infringes the right to a protected invention, industrial design, utility model or topography of semiconductor products is punished by imprisonment for the period of up to three years, or a monetary fine. Section 152 Infringement of copyright (1) The person who unlawfully disposes with a work which is the subject matter of the protection according to the copyright, or with a performance of a performing artist, with a sound or visual recording, with a broadcast or television programme which are the subject matter of the right similar to the copyright, in the manner which belongs to the author, performing artist, maker of a sound or visual recording, a broadcast or television organisation or other holder of this right, or the person who infringes the above-mentioned rights in some other manner, is punished by imprisonment for the period of up to two years, or by a monetary fine, or by forfeiture of a thing. (2) The perpetrator is punished by imprisonment for a period from six months up to five years, or by a monetary fine, or forfeiture of a thing, if: (a) this person gains by the action stated in paragraph 1 considerable benefit, or (b) this person commits an act of a large scope. When considering unlawful actions in terms of their intensity and thus establishing a criminal act it should be stressed that it is a matter for the judge’s discretion and before him that of the prosecutor. As for Section 150 the condition is the release of goods into free circulation, or the release of a service with a direct unlawful use of a protected sign. Experience which could be generalised, above all by the judiciary, has not yet been gained in the Slovak Republic. Second part In any case the determination of the amount of damage is a matter for the plaintiff. In case the amount of damage is adequately and reliably justified and proved the court has the grounds to adjudicate on the claimed damage. In cases where the right holder suffers material loss which does not have the character of damage from the legal point of view, as it was not caused by an illegal action, or in case of the occurrence of non material loss, the court can assign the right to adequate satisfaction to an injured party which can also be monetary performance. In such case the amount of monetary equivalent representing the satisfaction is determined in the judge’s discretion which is obviously based on the submitted request and, although it is not an objectively established fact but the fact modelled on the basis of a discretion, it must have a rational basis. We consider the above-mentioned facts answer the question as to what would be regarded as expenses of the right holder which have to be reimbursed pursuant to Article 45.1. A party to a proceeding who is successful, or partly successful, can be adjudicated the right to compensation for costs of the proceedings to the extent of his success. These include apart from legal fees, attorney’s fees and also other fees which were provable and purposefully expended in relation to the enforcement of the right in court. The reimbursement of attorney’s fees is objectively calculated according to the tariffs given by the Decree of the Ministry of Justice determining the remuneration of attorneys for individual acts according to their kind, amount of claim and number. As for the implementation of Article 45.2, second sentence of the TRIPS Agreement, according to our opinion it is included in Section 26 (3) of the Law on Trademarks No. 55/1997 Coll., which adjudicates the right to the compensation for damage, or the right to adequate satisfaction, which can also be monetary performance regardless of whether the infringer infringed the rights of the right holder and caused, knowingly or unknowingly, damage or other loss.

First of all it is necessary to reply to the part of question 1 regarding precedence of ratified and published international conventions over Slovak domestic law in case of any contradiction. In this respect it must be stressed that in accordance with Article 11 of the Constitution of the Slovak Republic only the conventions regulating human rights have direct precedence before law, so that in cases where an international convention provides for the rights of the above-mentioned character to a broader extent than the domestic law, and also in the cases where there is direct contradiction between any convention and the law, the court can apply directly the international convention. Pursuant to Article 125(e) of the Constitution of the Slovak Republic other international conventions also have precedence when the Constitutional Court makes decisions regarding the conformity of generally binding legal regulations with international conventions proclaimed in the manner provided for the promulgation of laws. If the Constitutional Court makes a decision with respect to the non conformity of the law with any international convention, this law, or its relevant part, ceases to be in force after the period of six months if, in the meantime, it has not been amended by the Parliament according to the decision of the Constitutional Court. As a result of the above, any international convention other than the convention on human rights has precedence over the domestic law, but this precedence cannot be applied directly, rather only after the above-mentioned process in the Constitutional Court. The process described under Article 125 of the Constitution is not used in practice because the international obligations in the form of agreements published in the Collection of Laws become part of domestic law. This status of international agreement results from provisions paragraphs 4(3), 6(1b) and 2 of Law No. 1/1993 Coll. The contingent contradiction or imperfection of legislation is eliminated by amendment or recodification of the mentioned provision.

The regulations regarding trademarks and customs at present do not entitle the right holder to officially request intervention by the customs authorities in matters regarding imitated or counterfeit products in relation to trademarks and copyright. According to Section 60 of the Law on Customs No. 180/1996 Coll. the customs authorities are obliged to take into consideration prohibitions and restrictions with regard to intellectual property protection in customs proceedings. The right holder can initiate the suspension of goods at the border and in case of his right the customs authorities are obliged to respect this. This amendment, though, is not sufficient as the right holder does not become a party to a proceeding through this action and has no procedural rights which he would have if he was a party to a proceeding. On the other hand a financial guarantee cannot be required in cases where the suspension of goods would be established as unjustified and would result in damage, or material loss. The present legislation does not comply with the provisions of Articles 52 through 57 and 59 of the TRIPS Agreement. Specific new legislation for the border measures addressing among other the provisions of the Articles 52 through 57 and 59 of the TRIPS Agreement is under consideration.

In the beginning it might be useful to mention that in the Slovak Republic the judicial system is composed of three levels – three instances. The first instance is represented by district courts courts of general jurisdiction. Then there is the second instance, consisting of county courts that function as appellate courts, and the last resort is represented by the supreme court, whose task is to reach decisions mainly in matters of extraordinary remedies. In some specified cases of commercial and criminal law, county courts act as first instance courts and the role of the appellate court is then passed to the supreme court. Slovak courts and judiciary are fully independent. This means that all the judges are bound only by their consciousness and valid law. The jurist opinion of courts of higher instance is obligatory to courts of lower instance only with respect to a particular case. Despite that, there exists predominantly an informal system of precedence which is customarily applied to all cases, granting that decisions of the supreme court (primarily those generalising and representative) are officially published and widely respected. In appellate proceedings (judicial reviews) the relevant court of higher instance is able either to modify or to confirm the sentence or, if the sentence is found inadequate, to suspend it altogether and remit the case to the respective court of lower instance. The regulations concerning civil procedures are provided for by the Slovak Code of Civil Procedure, Act No. 99/1963, Digest of Laws, in accordance with the wording of later regulations. Requirements that need to be complied with if a party intends to file an action are relatively simple. The party wishing to file an action has only to supply the following information in his or her formal written request: identification of the parties involved in the enforcement procedure to be initiated, the merits of the case, the evidence proposed and the proposal for the court regarding the desirable kind of decision it should reach. Pursuant to Section 80, letters b) and c) of the Slovak Code of Civil Procedure, in filing a legal action the party is able to require the court to decide primarily whether the duty established by the law is complied with in a legal relationship or in any violation of the law. The court could also determine whether there is any legal relationship or right at all given that there is an urgent valuable interest concerning this question. A party to an enforcement proceeding is thus entitled to ask the court to reach a decision in any of the ways corresponding to all the relevant criteria cited. In practice this means that courts decide on matters of damage payments, of adequate compensation for a non proprietary injury, which may also come in the form of financial compensation. Courts are authorised to order or forbid certain actions. Courts also decide on the existence or non existence of a right or legal relationship, given that there is a valuable interest concerning such a decision. Representation of a party by his or her counsel is not mandatory in trial proceedings, and legal fees account for 4% of the recoverable debt, the maximum amount being set as Sk 100 000, in commercial cases as Sk 500 000. There are several situations in which county courts function as first instance courts, namely in the following cases: enforcement of tradename rights, trademark rights and label of origin rights, then in matters of legal relationship concerning competition protection, unfair competition, patent rights, protected layout-designs and industrial designs and topography of semiconductor products as a subject of trade. The same applies to relationships resulting from copyrights and related rights. In such cases the supreme court functions as an appellate court. Formal requirements necessary for appealing against a sentence are more or less identical with those of filing an action. The structure of courts and their interrelationships are established by the Act on Courts and Judiciary No. 335/1991, Digest of Laws, in accordance with the wording of later regulations. The jurisdiction of courts concerning cases and localities as well as functions is established by the already cited Slovak Code of Civil Procedure. In the field of patent protection, there is the central administrative authority the Slovak Industrial Property Office ("SIPO"), which keeps the registers of separate subjects of industrial property, makes decisions regarding the entry or the cancellation in the registers, the annulment of the patent in the registers, changes in registers and the relevant agenda. The decision of SIPO can be, after all proper remedies of administrative proceedings have been exhausted, submitted to a court, if there is a formal request, and the court will review the decision’s legality. Decisions of SIPO can be reviewed by the supreme court. Aside from all the standard procedures of legal proceedings, in enforcement of rights, if there is a case of emergency, a request can be applied to obtain preliminary measures, pursuant to Section 74 and the following provisions of the Slovak Code of Civil Procedure. Pursuant to Section 76, paragraph 1, letters d), e) and f), through preliminary measures the court is authorised primarily to order a party to pay a security or to deposit an object in court, to do something, to abstain from something, or to bear something, or the court is able to forbid a party to use certain things or rights. Preliminary measures represent from a procedural point of view a considerably simplified and rapid action, allowing the court to omit hearing the parties in person, but on the other hand binding it to reach a decision within the set period of one month, starting from the day the respective action has been filed. Preliminary measures can be enforced immediately, regardless of any contingent appeal against them, however, their effect is limited temporarily and also by their content, since they should not substitute a proper decision on the merits of the case and their effect is in principle bound to filing a proper legal action subsequently, within a proper time period determined by the court. As soon as a proper decision on the merits of the case is reached, the effect of the preliminary measures ceases by law. Otherwise it can cease when the time period determined by the court is over, or if the party does not comply with his or her obligation and fails to file a proper legal action regarding the case.

Foreign parties have in principle the same position both in courts and before the Slovak Industrial Property Office as nationals or residents of the Slovak Republic. As far as the language barrier is concerned, a court is obliged to grant translation at the expenses of the party not speaking the Slovak language. In case there is a citizen of the Slovak Republic who does not speak Slovak, in court, the translation fees are paid by the State. Unlike a court proceeding, in an administrative proceeding before the Slovak Industrial Property Office a foreign party has to be represented by his or her patent attorney authorised to act before SIPO, that is, a patent attorney acting in the Slovak Republic.

See the reply to question 2. As has already been stated, the position of a foreign party is in principle identical with that of a citizen of the Slovak Republic.

The question of compensation for injury suffered because of abuse of judicial and administrative enforcement procedures is provided for by the Act on liability for injury suffered because of a State authority decision or because of wrong administrative procedure No. 58/1969 Coll. In the case of an injury caused by illegal decision or sentence it is necessary to make a formal claim for damage at the central authority superior to that authority which has caused the injury. Where the claim is not settled within 6 months, the injured party is able to claim his or her right in court. The State is liable for injuries caused by abuse of administrative proceedings. In this case no preliminary hearing of the claim is necessary. The claim can be prosecuted directly against the State and the particular authority which has caused the injury.

Legal fees are established by the Act on Legal Fees No. 71/1992, Digest of Laws. In the general part of this Act the following subjects are treated: legal fees, payers, exemption from legal fees, occurrence and cessation of payment duty, etc. A separate part of the Act, the Scale of Legal Fees, establishes particular amounts chargeable as fees. Considering enforcement of intellectual property rights, the second item is especially important, as long as it deals with actions concerning patents, inventions, industrial designs, layout-designs, topographies of semiconductor products as well as with copyright and other related rights. Legal fees here account for 4% of the price of the chose in action, the minimum being Sk 500, and the maximum Sk 500 000. In case the chose in action cannot be financially valued (e.g. in action for determination whether there exists any law at all), the legal fee is then established as Sk 2 000. Trade name rights actions, trademark actions and label of origin actions are regulated by Item 3 of the Scale of Legal Fees, all of these actions requiring a charge of Sk3 000. Legal fees are due as soon as the action is filed and also when a party is appealing against a decision. Administrative fees, that is the fees due for acts of administrative proceedings, are generally regulated by the Act on Administrative Fees No. 145/1995, Digest of Laws. As well as the Act on Legal Fees, this Act consists of two parts in its general part it treats the subject of administrative fees, of payers, of the occurrence of payment duty, etc. Its second part establishes legal fees according to specific legal acts. From the point of view of enforcement of intellectual property rights, Part XVI of the Scale of Legal Fees is especially important, as it establishes fees for acts in enforcement proceedings before the Slovak Industrial Property Office. As examples we cite here a few of the most important items: patent application – Sk 800, request for patent examining procedure up to 10 claims – Sk 2 500, patent deed up to 10 pages – Sk 2 000, extending the patent life, the third, the fourth and the fifth year, total – Sk 5 000, the sixth year – Sk 1 700, lay out design application – Sk 700, industrial design application – Sk 600, topography of semiconductor products application – Sk 5 000, trademark application up to 3 segments of products or services – Sk 3 000, request for erasure of a trademark from the register of trademarks – Sk 600, request for a renewal of trademark registration – Sk 2 500, application for label of origin – Sk 2 000. Legal and administrative fees are established in relevant Acts in the Digest of Laws and thus are fully available to public. Please refer to the relevant passages of both Acts set out in the Annex.

Procedural regulation of civil proceedings in court establishes no strict time periods concerning the end of a proceeding which is, eventually the court decision. On the other hand, pursuant to Article 48, paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the Slovak Republic, "Everybody has the right to have his or her case heard publicly, without unnecessary delays and in his or her presence...". This basic human right is extended in Section 100, paragraph 1 of the Slovak Code of Civil Procedure, which goes as follows: "As soon as the proceeding has been initiated, the court proceeds further, even if there are no further proposals, and in such a manner that the case be heard and decided as fast as possible." The issue of delays in legal proceedings has already been treated by the Constitutional Court of the Slovak Republic, which in a particular case proclaimed unnecessary delays in legal proceedings as violation of a basic human right, in accordance with the wording of the cited regulation of Article 48 of the Constitution of the Slovak Republic. The Slovak Code of Civil Procedure establishes also quite a few time periods concerning the procedural law. Section 204 establishes the time period available for appeal against a decision as 15 days since the decision delivery. Section 230 establishes the time period for a special legal remedy, in particular a re enforcement of proceedings as a limitation of 3 months since the reasons for re enforcement cited in the law were discovered and 3 years since the finality of judgment. Section 240 also establishes a time period of 3 months for a special legal remedy appeal against a decision, which can also be applied only on the basis of explicitly specified reasons, which in general represent violation of the law from the side of the court. Section 250, letter b) establishes a time period of two months allowed for a legal revision of a decision adopted by an administrative body. Section 160, paragraph 1 establishes a time period of three days for complying with the obligation resulting from a court decision, if the court does not specify a different time period. Only Section 75, paragraph 2 of the Slovak Code of Civil Procedure establishes a duty for the court to decide in the matter of application for preliminary measures. Civil Code of Law also provides for a considerably large number of time periods concerning the material law. Sections 100 to 105 of the Civil Code of Law establish a time period for enforcement as being three years since the law could have been enforced for the first time. Section 106, the Civil Code of Law establishes a time period that allows to enforce a claim for damage of three years since the damage occurred, at the last, however, the claim has to be enforced within two years since the injured party found out who was responsible for the damage. The right to claim damage for a bodily injury never lapses, thus it can always be enforced. The right of submitting groundless pecuniary advantage is enforceable within the same time period, otherwise it lapses. The right to execute a valid court decision or administrative decision lapses after the term of ten years since that decision came into effect. For administrative proceedings there exists a key regulation the Act on Administrative Proceedings No. 71/1967, Digest of Laws, pursuant to which the proceedings in the Slovak Industrial Property Office are also carried out and, if a special legal regulation does not state it otherwise, Section 49 establishes time periods available for reaching decisions in administrative proceedings. In simple cases the respective administrative body is obliged to reach a decision without any delays, in other cases, if a special legal regulation does not state it otherwise, the administrative body is obliged to reach a decision within 30 days, in difficult cases within 60 days, since the proceedings initiation. If it is not possible with respect to the nature of the case to reach a decision within the established term of 60 days, an appellate body has to decide in matters of possible prolongation of the term. If the term is to be prolonged beyond 30, eventually 60 days, the party to the enforcement proceedings has to be duly notified. Pursuant to Section 54, a party to a proceeding is able to appeal against a decision within the time period of 15 days since the decision was announced, that means, in principle, delivered in writing. Concerning enforcement of trademark rights, this time period is extended up to one month. Other time periods with respect to enforcement of special legal remedies are established in sections 53 to 68. As far as the Act on Trademarks is concerned, the time periods allowing a party to appeal against a decision are modified, as has already been stated above in Section 42, and this prolongation applies also to grievances against a published application for a trademark according to Section 9, where the time period is up to three months.