After elapsing twenty years from stating a general rule of admissibility for recovering damages for late payment by Art 522 of the Civil Procedural Code, there are still some ambiguities and issues which have not been resolved so far. One of these matters is the possibility of recovering such damages from the government within the 18-month time period provided by the Law on Payment of Government Monetary Convictions and Non-Provision and Seizure of Government Property enacted in 1986. Evaluating the judgements, legal doctrines and regulations show that those who believe in not possibility of recovering these damages do consider the 18-month deadline as an excuse or insolvency condition. Therefore, the government can cite these facts as like every insolvent and excuser. But opponents mention the concept of insolvency cannot basically be applied to government status and, in fact, that deadline is only for forbidding seizure of government property, not an opportunity for payment. So, based on the principle of obligation to pay and the exceptionality of that time period only for the seizure of government property and also the necessity to fully compensate for the loss, especially in the current high inflation, any doubt about the admissibility of such damages should be set aside. We are trying to address this issue based on library and descriptive research.