According to Закарпатський окружний адміністративний суд, the court found the mobilisation of a 50‑year‑old student unlawful and cancelled orders issued by the territorial recruitment centre (ТЦК) and by the military unit.
Details of the studies and the registered deferment
The plaintiff, born in 1976, was studying full‑time at the Свалявський технічний фаховий коледж Національного університету харчових технологій, specialising in «Туризм і рекреація» (Tourism and Recreation). A certificate from the educational institution dated 1 July 2023 confirmed that the man was a second‑year student, had no academic arrears, followed an individual study plan and had not breached the terms of the contract for the provision of educational services.
The electronic military‑registration document in the «Резерв+» app reflected a deferment in force until 1 August 2026 as of 18 July 2026. On the same day the head of the territorial recruitment centre (ТЦК) issued an order calling the man up for military service during mobilisation.
The TRC’s position on the grounds for conscription
The ТЦК explained the conscription by expressing doubts about the actual attendance of the studies: during an interview, the centre claimed, the man allegedly failed to answer questions about the study plan, could not name core subjects and could not explain the procedure for taking examinations. The centre considered this might indicate that the studies had been recorded formally solely to obtain a deferment.
Representatives of the centre also argued that the plaintiff had not provided proper confirmation of his right to a deferment, in particular a certificate from the Unified State Electronic Database on Education. The military unit that received the documents from the ТЦК explained that it was not authorised to verify the grounds for a deferment and acted on the information provided to it.
Court decision and subsequent consequences
The court established that at the time of conscription the man continued to study full‑time and had not been expelled, and the defendants did not provide evidence of termination of studies or loss of the right to a deferment. The court also referred to paragraphs 59 and 60 of Order No. 560, according to which the cancellation of a deferment must take place in the prescribed manner by a decision of the relevant commission at the ТЦК or automatically on the basis of state registers, and found that no such decision had been taken in this case.
Закарпатський окружний адміністративний суд fully upheld the claim: it found the actions of the ТЦК regarding the conscription unlawful, cancelled the ТЦК order of 18 July 2026 No.М382 insofar as it related to the conscription, found unlawful and cancelled the commander of the military unit’s order of 24 July 2026 No. 55 on enrolment in the personnel, and obliged the military unit to remove the plaintiff from its personnel lists. The decision may be appealed to the Восьмого апеляційного адміністративного суду within 30 days from the date the full court decision is drawn up.
Before being enrolled in the unit the man underwent a military medical commission, which declared him fit for service, and on 24 July 2026 he was entered on the personnel list and assigned as a gunner‑anti‑aircraft operator of the anti‑aircraft missile platoon of an assault battalion.
