CMS Expert Guide on Preliminary Injunctions in IP in Slovenia

Any non-monetary claims, (with which the purpose of security can be achieved,) can be subject to PIs, including but not limited to:

• prohibiting the alleged infringing party from continuing the alleged infringement or committing any future infringements;
• seizing, removing from circulation and holding the infringing items, as well as the means of the infringement that are intended or used exclusively or principally for the infringement.

No, out of court action before filing an application is not required.  

No, PI can be issued before the opening of the court proceedings, during the proceedings and after the proceedings have been concluded, as long as the conditions for enforcement are not met. 

It depends on the specifics of the case. However, PI proceedings are considered urgent and must be conducted without delay by the court.

Yes, PI proceedings can be suspended due to the following reasons:

• the applicant has failed to bring an action within the specified time limit or to initiate other proceedings to justify the PI;
• the applicant did not act as instructed by the court (e.g., regarding which actions to bring, which proceedings to initiate or which evidence to provide) in cases where the PI was granted before an action was brought or if it was granted for securing a claim, that had not yet arisen at that time;
• at the infringer’s request, if circumstances have changed since the granting of the PI, making the PI no longer necessary;
• at the infringer’s request, if (i) the infringer deposits with the court the amount of the secured claim, including interest and costs, (ii) the infringer demonstrates the probability that, at the time of the issuing of the PI, the claim has already been paid or appropriately secured, (iii) it is determined by way of a final decision that the claim has never come into existence or that it has ceased to exist.

For the PI to be issued, the applicant must demonstrate that:

• they are the holder of an IP right with the standard of proof being probability; and
• their rights have been infringed or there is a real risk of infringement.

The applicant must also demonstrate that one of the following conditions is met, with the standard of proof being probability:

• there is a risk that the enforcement of claims will be rendered impossible or significantly difficult;
• the PI is necessary to prevent damage that would be difficult to repair; or
• if the PI is granted but later proves to be unfounded in the course of proceedings, the harm to the alleged infringing party would not outweigh the harm to the right holder if the PI was not granted.

If PI is requested without prior notification and hearing of the opposite party, the applicant must also demonstrate, in addition to the requirements above, that there are grounds to believe that any delay in issuing the PI would cause damage that is difficult to repair.

The applicant doesn’t need to demonstrate that there is a risk that the enforcement of claims will be made impossible or significantly difficult if they demonstrate, with the standard of proof being probability, that the proposed PI would cause only negligible damage to the alleged infringing party. Such a risk shall be deemed to exist when the claims are to be enforced abroad, unless a claim is to be enforced in another Member State of the European Union.

Yes, see Q6, para. 3.

Yes. The request for reimbursement of the costs must be submitted as soon as the costs are incurred, and the amount is known no later than 30 days after the conclusion of enforcement proceedings or the completion of the last enforcement action.

No. Nevertheless, if the applicant fails to demonstrate the probability of the existence of the claim or the risk, the court may still issue the PI at the applicant’s request, provided that the applicant deposits the amount determined by the court as a security deposit for any potential loss that may be suffered by the potential infringer, if the PI is granted and enforced. 

It is possible to file an objection against the PI. The objection is permitted only on limited grounds and must be reasoned (supported by relevant facts and evidence).

Filing an objection does not suspend the effect of the PI. 

An objection may be filed within 8 days of the issuance of the PI. The objection is then forwarded to the applicant, who has 8 days to submit a response. If the applicant fails to respond, all factual allegations made by the infringer will be deemed to be true.

The court must decide on the objection to the PI within 30 days from the day the response to the objection is filed or from the expiry of the deadline for filing the response.   

A PI becomes effective as soon as it is served to the infringer.  

It depends on the circumstances of each individual case. Typically, in matters concerning intellectual property, the PI will include some form of prohibition. The prohibition becomes effective upon the service of the PI on the infringer. If the infringer fails to comply, the applicant may notify the court, which can then issue an order on imposing a monetary penalty and new prohibition. If non-compliance continues, the court imposes a higher monetary penalty. Another measure can be seizure or removal of the infringing goods. These items may be seized or removed directly on the basis of the PI, as the PI has the effect of a writ of execution.

It is on the applicant to determine which enforcement measure would be the most appropriate to stop the infringement. 

Yes, the counterparty has the right to demand compensation from the applicant for any damage suffered as a consequence of a PI being unjustified and subsequently revoked. 

Yes, further proceedings are required. The applicant must file an action within the time limit specified in the PI. A higher standard of proof is required to grant a final injunction, and all evidence will be fully evaluated on its merits in accordance with the rules on civil procedure.