65It should be borne in mind that, according to Article 74(1), in fine, of Regulation No 40/94, in proceedings relating to relative grounds for refusal of registration, the examination is restricted to the facts, evidence and arguments provided by the parties and the relief sought. Article 74(1), in fine, of Regulation No 40/94 also applies to cancellation proceedings involving a relative ground for invalidity under Article 52 of that regulation (Case T-288/03TeleTech Holdings v OHIM - Teletech International (TELETECH GLOBAL VENTURES) [2005] ECR II-1767, paragraph 65). Therefore, in invalidity proceedings relating to relative grounds for invalidity, the onus is on the party which brought the invalidity proceedings in reliance on an earlier national trade mark to prove its existence and, as the case may be, the extent of protection (see, in that sense, Case T-318/03Atomic Austria v OHIM — Fabricas Agrupadas de Muñecas de Onil (ATOMIC BLITZ) [2005] ECR II-1319, paragraph 33).