In short
Calling the basis of the proceedings forged does not stop the enforcement file at that moment. A stop is read from an objection record that stands in the file, or from a court decision. A criminal-complaint number is not an enforcement annotation. A text of a forged note is not produced in this article. How the document is filled in is not written either. The first reading of the papers is in the article on enforcement while I have no debt.
The sentence that is said is not a stay annotation
The enforcement office does not stop the proceedings by itself when it hears an allegation of forgery. In proceedings without a judgment, a stop is spoken with an objection paper in proper form. The measure of the time is not in this text. If the objection paper is not in the file, a stop is not assumed. An oral sentence of forgery does not stand in for that paper. That the objection later falls from effect is not the subject of this text either.
The objection paper must show which line of which document is debated. A sentence that the papers are forged in general does not stop all the bases in the file. If there is more than one basis, the allegation writes which one it is directed at. A document it is not directed at does not stop by itself with the other's allegation. If the objection relates to a part of the debt, the remaining part is read separately. The remainder is not erased as if there were an objection.
The enforcement office does not build a judgment on forgery. The office enters in the file the objection record, or the court decision, that is before it. If there is no record, there is no annotation to enter either. The debtor's statement record does not stand in for the objection petition. Whether the record carries a sentence of "it is forged" or does not, a stay annotation is read only from a record in proper form.
Signature, content, and want of connection
Three allegations do not fit in the same sentence of a petition. Saying the signature is not mine is a denial of the signature. The examination is spoken by the court's referral. An allegation that the content changed later is not a copy of the denial of the signature. An allegation that the document has nothing to do with this debt is a third door. The door is chosen according to the basis line in the request for proceedings. A door that is not chosen does not take the other's result by itself.
The method of the examination is not written in this text. The court may ask for an examination. The request does not prescribe how the allegation will be built. The allegation stays at showing which line of which document is debated. A sample text of a document, an order of filling in, and the preparation of a forged paper are not on this page. If a photograph or a copy of the document in hand is not in the file, a copy is not produced.
A sentence of "the signature is mine, but I do not accept this debt" is not an allegation of forgery. This sentence is a separate door relating to the merits of the debt. The door is not pasted onto the enforcement file as a forgery annotation. "I did not write the content" and "the signature is not mine" are not joined as the same result. A petition that is joined leaves uncertain which allegation the court will examine. An uncertain sentence is not treated as having stopped the proceedings.
A criminal complaint does not write an annotation
An application made to the prosecutor's office may open a criminal file. The number of the criminal file does not write a stay annotation on the enforcement file. The opening of an investigation does not stop the proceedings at that moment either. The opening of a prosecution is not an enforcement annotation by itself either. The court may make the criminal file a preliminary issue. This is a matter of a decision. If there is no decision, a wait is not assumed. If the decision writes which enforcement file it held up, that file is read. If it does not write it, all the proceedings are not treated as stopped.
The account in the criminal complaint does not stand in for the request for enforcement proceedings. An amount written in the complaint does not change the amount in the enforcement file by itself. If the person mentioned in the complaint and the party in the proceedings differ, the difference is not hidden. A decision not to proceed with the complaint, or a decision of non-prosecution, is not a judgment that the debt exists either. This decision does not announce the basis as genuine. The enforcement file does not write the result of the criminal papers as an annotation by itself.
A criminal court's judgment of acquittal or conviction is reflected in the enforcement file only if that judgment is put before enforcement and read. While there is no judgment, the complaint number cannot be used as if there were an acquittal. Even if there is a judgment, this text does not prescribe step by step how the judgment will affect the enforcement file. What is read is whether there is a decision to stop in existence.
An interim measure is a decision separate from the allegation
An interim measure is a separate request. A sentence of forgery is not an interim-measure decision. The frame of the measure is in the article on an interim measure in a negative declaratory action. A finding that one is not the debtor is in the article on a negative declaratory action. The declaratory petition is not the enforcement office's stay annotation. That the petition was given does not have the measure treated as accepted.
A stop is not assumed before the interim-measure decision is entered in the enforcement file. If the decision writes which act will stop, that act is read. If it does not write it, all attachment and sale acts are not treated as stopped. The lifting or the refusal of the measure does not mean the allegation of forgery was refused too. The two records stand apart. One does not erase the other's result.
A provisional attachment, or another temporary record, is not a measure of forgery. The lifting of those records does not show that the basis is forged either. Whichever file the lifting writing belongs to, that file is read. Another file's measure is not copied as the annotation of these proceedings.
A judgment is not renamed as a note
In proceedings under a judgment, if the basis is a judgment, the mould of forgery of a note is not the same sentence. The party and the subject of the judgment are read from the text of the judgment. The judgment is not renamed as a note. The mould of a forged note is not pasted onto a file under a judgment. An allegation of the forgery of a judgment is the subject of a separate judgment, outside the text of the judgment. This text does not build that action. If the judgment is not in hand, a sentence that the judgment is forged is not completed with a decision that is remembered.
A witness or a document in the reasoning of the judgment does not make the judgment itself a note. If the proceedings rest on the operative part of the judgment, the line that is debated is the operative part. A note that is not in the operative part is not added as the basis of proceedings under a judgment. If the judgment and the note were put together in the same file, the request writes which one it rests on. A document that was not written does not fall by itself with the forgery of the other.
An annotation of finality is not a judgment about the forgery of the judgment. If there is no annotation, this text does not say the judgment has not become final. If there is an annotation, the allegation of forgery is not treated as erased by the annotation either. The two records are read side by side.
Which paper the basis line shows
The allegation must show the document written in the request for proceedings. A note, a cheque, an invoice, or a contract is whatever is written on the line. If the date, the amount, and the party line are not in the file, this text does not add a line. A general sentence that the papers are forged does not say which paper will stop. A cheque and a note, an invoice and a contract, are not joined as the same door. The place of each in the proceedings is read from the basis line in the request.
An action relating to putting property out of hand is not the name of an allegation that the basis is forged. That action is not built in this text. The basis line and the criminal papers must stand side by side. One does not stand in for the other. A release, a payment, or an assignment document is not chosen by itself as the basis of an allegation of forgery. If these documents are in the file, they are read with their own lines. If they are not, they are not produced to complete an account of forgery.
An admission of the debt and forgery are not melted in the same sentence. An admission may say the document belongs to the debtor. Forgery debates the document's connection with that debt, or its content. If the two sentences will stand side by side in one petition, each carries its own result. One does not erase the other. That the enforcement stops is read not from this melting, but from the objection record in the file or from a court decision.
If there is more than one debtor in the file, the allegation must show which debtor is directed at which document. One debtor's sentence does not stop the other's proceedings by itself. A surety, an endorser, or an avalist is not melted in the same sentence as the debtor on the note. Each capacity is read from the party line in the request. If there is no line, a capacity is not invented. A company stamp and a personal signature are not the same debate. Which one's forgery is alleged is separated in the petition. A petition that does not separate is not treated as having taken both the company and the person out of the proceedings at the same time.
If the photocopy of the document and the original differ, the allegation writes which copy stands in the proceedings. A copy that was not put in the request for proceedings does not become the subject of a stay annotation. That production of the original was asked does not stop the proceedings before production happens. If the production record is not in the file, it is not assumed that the document arrived. Whether the document that arrived is the same as the earlier copy is not prescribed in this text either. A prescription would be producing a forged text. There is no production. What is read is the basis line in hand and the stop record in the file.
Conclusion
An allegation of forgery does not mean the proceedings stopped at that moment. A stop is read from an objection record or a court decision. A criminal complaint does not stand in for this record. Signature, content, and want of connection are not the same door. A judgment is not renamed as a note. A text of a forged note is not produced. The frame stands on the enforcement and bankruptcy law page. The basis is the text of the Enforcement and Bankruptcy Code No. 2004. If the basis line is in hand, it may also be read through contact.