A man applied for a deferral through the Administrative Service Centre but received violator status in the “Obereg” registry: how the dispute with the TRC ended

The Zaporizhzhia District Administrative Court concluded that the Territorial Recruitment and Social Support Center cannot enter information about a person's violation of military registration rules into the Unified State Register of Conscripts, Reservists, and Military Obliged Persons if there is no data on the person's administrative liability in accordance with the law. The court ordered the removal of the corresponding entry from the register.

The court emphasized that the legislation allows entering information into the register about a person's administrative liability under Articles 210 or 210-1 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses (CUAO) with reference to the relevant procedural documents. At the same time, entering separate information about the violation of military registration rules itself is not provided for by law.

Circumstances of the case

The plaintiff was registered for military service at one of the Territorial Recruitment and Social Support Centers.

On December 30, 2025, he submitted an application through the Administrative Service Centre for a deferral from conscription during mobilization due to caring for his mother, who has a Group I disability.

Later, the man received a summons to the TRC on January 3, 2026, to clarify his registration data. The day before, he informed the territorial center in writing about his inability to appear on the specified date and notified that he had already submitted documents for the deferral.

Subsequently, the TRC informed the plaintiff that by failing to appear for the summons, he violated the military registration rules and also notified him about contacting the National Police to resolve the issue of his delivery to the territorial recruitment center.

At the same time, no rulings on bringing the man to administrative responsibility were issued. He associated this with a violation of his rights and appealed to the court.

What the court found

During the case review, the court established that before the disputed summons was sent, the plaintiff had already updated his military registration data and submitted an application for a deferral through the Administrative Service Centre. These circumstances were confirmed by the case materials and were not refuted by the defendant.

The court noted that under these circumstances, the defendant did not prove the grounds for summoning the plaintiff specifically to clarify registration data.

The court also found that the defendant did not provide any evidence of drawing up a protocol on an administrative offense against the plaintiff or issuing a ruling on bringing him to responsibility under Article 210-1 of the CUAO.

Nevertheless, information about his violation of military registration rules was entered into the Unified State Register of Conscripts, Reservists, and Military Obliged Persons.

Legal position of the court

Analyzing the Law "On the Unified State Register of Conscripts, Reservists, and Military Obliged Persons," the court concluded that the list of data that can be entered into the register is exhaustive.

In particular, Article 7 of this Law provides for entering information about a person's administrative liability under Articles 210 or 210-1 of the CUAO, indicating the date, number, and content of the protocol or ruling. At the same time, the law does not provide for entering information about the violation of military registration rules itself without undergoing the procedure of bringing to responsibility.

The court also referred to the legal position of the Supreme Court, according to which the procedure for bringing to administrative responsibility begins with drawing up and presenting a protocol to the person, and the question of the presence or absence of an offense is resolved during the case review and the adoption of the relevant ruling.

Since the defendant did not prove the fact of bringing the plaintiff to administrative responsibility, the court recognized the entry of information about his violation of military registration rules into the register as unlawful.

What the court decided

The Zaporizhzhia District Administrative Court partially satisfied the claim.

The court recognized the actions of the TRC regarding entering information about the plaintiff's violation of military registration rules into the Unified State Register of Conscripts, Reservists, and Military Obliged Persons as unlawful and ordered the removal of this information from the register. In addition, the court awarded the plaintiff 1,331.20 UAH in court fees at the expense of the defendant's budget allocations.

Thus, in case No. 280/3057/26, the court concluded that information about bringing a person to administrative responsibility in cases provided by law may be entered into the “Obereg” Register, while entering a separate record about violation of military registration rules without confirmation of such liability contradicts the requirements of the legislation.

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