In the eyes of jurists and jurisprudence, it is obvious that the government, governmental institutions, and legal persons cannot claim insolvency from the cost of litigation. Regarding some historical records, legal points, and practical considerations, revising this obvious idea is a necessity. The possibility of claim of insolvency from the cost of litigation is one of the prerequisites for a lawsuit, and the reasons expressed in justifying the deprivation of this right from government agencies are not convincing. Also, the government's financial ability and the huge amount of property of this legal person do not mean the ability of its components to pay the huge expenses of litigation. In addition, the budget restrictions and rules governing the governmental property sometimes make it difficult or even impossible to pay the unforeseen expenses of the trial. Since the hearing of this claim is not prohibited by the laws and does not contradict legal principles too, thus it seems that depriving the ministries and government institutions to prove their insolvency from paying the cost of trial is illogical. Prohibition of government agencies from proving insolvency in paying the cost of litigation requires undesirable sequences and damage to the government's rights and is an obstacle to the equality of persons in a fair trial and access to justice. The purpose of this lawsuit is to preserve the government's rights and get time to pay the legal fees, and its acceptance will be temporary and conditional.