Studying under the Erasmus+ exchange program does not guarantee protection from expulsion: The Supreme Court explained why

On July 28, 2026, the Supreme Court, composed of the panel of judges of the Second Judicial Chamber of the Civil Cassation Court, reviewed case No. 694/515/25 concerning the legality of expelling a student who studied under an exchange program at a foreign university. The Court clarified whether a tripartite agreement between universities and the student is sufficient to exercise the right to academic mobility and guarantee the preservation of the place of study.

The ruling has practical significance for students participating in international exchange programs as well as for higher education institutions, as it outlines the mandatory conditions for acquiring the status of an academic mobility participant and the limits of applying guarantees provided by the Law of Ukraine "On Higher Education."

Circumstances of the case

The plaintiff, a third-year student of the Faculty of History at Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, studied at Lund University (Sweden) under the Erasmus+ academic exchange program.

She stated that a tripartite agreement on studying was concluded between her, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, and Lund University, which provided for academic mobility and mutual recognition of study results. Despite this, the university issued an order for her expulsion due to failure to fulfill the individual study plan and later refused to reinstate her.

The plaintiff requested the cancellation of the expulsion order and her reinstatement as a student, arguing that she actually studied under the agreed exchange program, successfully completed the study plan at Lund University, and that formal non-compliance with certain administrative procedures cannot be grounds for expulsion.

The courts of first and appellate instances denied the claim, after which the case was reviewed by the Supreme Court.

Position of the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court indicated that according to the Law of Ukraine "On Higher Education," higher education seekers exercising the right to academic mobility are guaranteed the preservation of their place of study and such persons are not expelled from the list of higher education seekers.

Therefore, persons studying at another higher education institution (scientific institution) within Ukraine or abroad under a student exchange program between universities (academic mobility) are not expelled from the list of higher education seekers.

At the same time, the Court noted that to exercise the right to academic mobility, the legislation and the Procedure for Exercising the Right to Academic Mobility establish a mandatory procedure.

A person selected to participate in the academic mobility program concludes an academic mobility agreement with the Ukrainian educational institution, and after its conclusion, the head of the institution issues an administrative document from the date of which the person acquires the status of an academic mobility participant.

The academic mobility agreement, concluded during the implementation of any type or form of academic mobility by a Ukrainian participant studying under a state (regional) order, must mandatorily include a requirement not to extend the period of obtaining the corresponding educational, educational-scientific/educational-creative level or scientific degree, and in case of non-fulfillment of this requirement — the extension of the education period beyond the normative for such educational, educational-scientific/educational-creative level or scientific degree at the expense of physical (legal) persons.

The Court noted that according to the Regulations of Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, to obtain academic mobility, it is necessary to obtain the appropriate approvals, conclude an academic mobility agreement, and approve an individual academic mobility study plan, and the specified list of documents must be submitted to the academic mobility department no later than seven calendar days before the start of the program.

The Supreme Court established that the plaintiff obtained the right to study at Lund University under the exchange program and used it, but did not fulfill all the conditions set by the university to exercise the right to academic mobility, as she did not obtain the necessary approvals, did not conclude an academic mobility agreement with the university, and did not approve an individual academic mobility study plan.

The Court emphasized that since the plaintiff did not properly formalize the academic mobility agreement and did not approve the individual study plan, she did not acquire the right provided by part two of Article 46 of the Law of Ukraine "On Higher Education" to preserve her place of study according to the Procedure for Exercising the Right to Academic Mobility.

Separately, the Supreme Court stressed that the mere conclusion of a tripartite agreement is an agreement on cooperation between educational institutions but is not a basis for academic mobility.

Thus, the Supreme Court dismissed the cassation appeal and left the decisions of the lower courts unchanged.

The Court concluded that the existence of a tripartite agreement on studying under the Erasmus+ program and actual study at a foreign university alone do not confirm the acquisition of the status of an academic mobility participant. To apply the guarantees, the student must undergo the established academic mobility registration procedure, including concluding an academic mobility agreement, obtaining the necessary approvals, and approving an individual study plan.

Also read: studied at a university but did not receive a diploma – will this period count towards work experience.

Subscribe to our Telegram-channel t.me/sudua and on Google News SUD.UA, as well as on our VIBER and WhatsApp, Facebook page and on Instagram to stay updated on the most important events.