Supreme Administrative Court  in a sentence of June 27, 2019 (signature: II FSK 2493/17), adjudicated that “A statement in the course of enforcement proceedings that the debtor is the owner of the property does not mean that the ineffectiveness has not occurred. It is necessary to state that the length of real estate execution and the anticipated enforcement costs in the event of such enforcement will not exceed the proceeds to cover the debt. It is not necessary to seize real estate to establish the ineffectiveness of enforcement.”

The case law of the Supreme Administrative Court encourages me to formally understand insolvency and ineffectiveness of enforcement.