The Territorial Recruitment and Social Support Center Ignored a Deferral Request from a Father of Many Children Who Was Abroad — Court Intervened

The Lviv District Administrative Court concluded that the Territorial Recruitment and Social Support Center is obliged to consider a deferral request from conscripts and make a substantive decision if such a request is submitted by the conscript himself. In this case, the court recognized the inaction of the Territorial Recruitment Center as unlawful because it did not review the deferral request or make any decision based on it.

At the same time, the court emphasized that it cannot independently decide on granting a deferral instead of the Territorial Recruitment Center commission. Therefore, the claim was partially satisfied: the inaction was declared unlawful, and the defendant was ordered to reconsider the requests and make an appropriate decision.

Case circumstances

The plaintiff is registered for military service and supports four minor children. According to paragraph 3 of part one of article 23 of the Law "On Mobilization Preparation and Mobilization," conscripts who raise three or more children under 18 years old are exempt from conscription during mobilization, provided there is no alimony debt. Previously, the man had already received deferrals on this basis.

In November 2025, he sent deferral requests and necessary documents by mail through the Lviv Administrative Services Center for further transfer to the Territorial Recruitment Center, as well as separately addressed directly to the head of the relevant commission of the Territorial Recruitment Center. The defendant's receipt of the documents was confirmed by postal documents and was not disputed by the Territorial Recruitment Center itself.

However, the commission did not make any decision to grant or deny the deferral.

After a lawyer's inquiry, the Territorial Recruitment Center stated that the deferral request must be submitted in person through the Administrative Services Center according to the Procedure approved by Cabinet of Ministers Resolution No. 560. No other decisions were made regarding the plaintiff's appeals.

What the court established

The court analyzed the provisions of Procedure No. 560 and noted that the rules about personal submission of the request primarily define the subject of the appeal. That is, the expression of will must come directly from the conscript, not from his representative or another person.

In the court's opinion, the requirement for personal submission does not mean mandatory physical presence at the Administrative Services Center as the only possible way to submit documents. Sending the request by mail by the conscript himself is also a form of personal expression of will and does not change the subject of the appeal.

The court took into account that the applicant was abroad

The court also found that at the time of the appeal, the plaintiff was outside Ukraine.

Materials of the case showed that physical acceptance of documents at the Lviv Administrative Services Center in Gdansk was not carried out. The plaintiff was informed about the possibility of arranging a deferral through the "Reserve+" app or by personally contacting the Administrative Services Center department in Ukraine.

Under these circumstances, sending the request by mail was considered by the court as an accessible way to exercise the right to appeal. Therefore, this method of submitting documents alone could not be a reason for refusal to consider them.

Why the court recognized the inaction as unlawful

The court noted that after receiving the requests and supporting documents, the Territorial Recruitment Center had the obligation to consider them on the merits and make a decision to grant or deny the deferral.

Instead, the defendant did not make any decision in the form prescribed by law but only sent clarifications regarding the method of submitting documents.

According to the court, such behavior does not indicate the exercise of discretionary powers but unlawful inaction, since the Territorial Recruitment Center effectively did not fulfill its legal duty to consider the appeal and make the legally required decision.

Why the court did not order to grant the deferral

The plaintiff requested not only to recognize the inaction as unlawful but also to oblige the Territorial Recruitment Center to grant him a deferral.

The court denied this part.

The court explained that the issue of granting or denying a deferral belongs to the competence of the Territorial Recruitment Center commission. The administrative court cannot substitute the authority and make a decision instead of it.

Therefore, the proper remedy is to oblige the defendant to reconsider the requests and make a decision in accordance with the law, taking into account the legal assessment provided in the court's ruling.

Court decision

The Lviv District Administrative Court recognized the inaction of the Territorial Recruitment Center regarding the failure to consider the conscript's deferral requests during mobilization as unlawful.

The court also obliged the defendant to reconsider the requests dated November 24, 2025, and make decisions based on their consideration in accordance with current legislation.

The court refused to satisfy the demand to directly grant the deferral, as such a decision falls within the competence of the Territorial Recruitment Center commission.

Additionally, the court ordered the defendant to pay the plaintiff court fees amounting to 1064.96 UAH from budget funds.

Thus, in case No. 380/1606/26, the court concluded that the Territorial Recruitment Center had no grounds to leave the deferral requests unconsidered solely due to the method of their submission and was obliged to make a substantive decision on the appeal — to grant or deny the deferral.

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 Instagram to stay informed about the most important events.