Foreign University PhD Student Failed to Prove Right to Deferment from Mobilization — Documents Lacked Apostille
The Khmelnytskyi District Administrative Court reviewed a dispute regarding the refusal of the Territorial Recruitment and Social Support Center to grant a deferment from conscription during mobilization to a military liable person studying in a postgraduate program at a foreign higher education institution.
The court examined the legality of the commission's decision on granting deferments and clarified whether documents about studying at a foreign university can confirm the right to deferment without a certificate from the Unified State Electronic Database on Education.
Circumstances of the Case
The military liable person filed a lawsuit to cancel the decision of the commission at the territorial recruitment and social support center, which denied him a deferment from conscription during mobilization. The plaintiff also requested the commission be obliged to grant a deferment based on paragraph 1 of part 3 of article 23 of the Law "On Mobilization Preparation and Mobilization."
The plaintiff stated that he previously obtained a master's degree in Ukraine and since October 2025 has been studying full-time in a postgraduate program at a foreign university in Poland, pursuing the third educational and scientific level of higher education — a Doctor of Philosophy degree. In February 2026, he submitted an application for deferment through the Administrative Services Center, attaching documents which, in his opinion, confirmed the fact of study and compliance with the sequence of obtaining education.
The commission refused to grant the deferment, citing the absence of a certificate about the student formed in the Unified State Electronic Database on Education (USEDE). The plaintiff considered this refusal formal and inconsistent with the actual circumstances since he had submitted documents confirming his postgraduate study and right to deferment.
Court's Decision
The court cited the provisions of article 23 of the Law "On Mobilization Preparation and Mobilization," according to which those pursuing professional, vocational pre-higher, and higher education full-time or dual form and obtaining a higher education level in the legally established sequence are exempt from conscription during mobilization.
The court also analyzed the rules for conscription during mobilization approved by Cabinet of Ministers Resolution No. 560. The court noted that Appendix 5 and paragraph 62 of these rules explicitly require persons claiming deferment as higher education students or doctoral candidates to submit a certificate about the student formed in USEDE in the prescribed form.
At the same time, the court noted that foreign educational institutions do not have access to Ukraine's USEDE, are not entities maintaining this database, and cannot issue the relevant certificates. Moreover, a foreign higher education institution is not an educational activity entity that can be included in the Register of Educational Activity Entities of USEDE.
The court emphasized that proper proof of studying abroad can be legalized foreign documents. Such documents must be duly certified in the country of origin by consular legalization or apostille according to Ukraine's international agreements.
The court found that the certificates submitted by the plaintiff about enrollment in full-time study at the foreign educational institution did not contain an apostille. Therefore, they could not be considered proper proof of study and did not confirm the right to deferment from conscription under paragraph 1 of part 3 of article 23 of the Law "On Mobilization Preparation and Mobilization."
The court concluded in case No. 560/3909/26 that the plaintiff did not provide proper and admissible evidence confirming his study at the higher education institution to a degree sufficient to establish the right to deferment. Thus, there were no grounds to recognize the commission's decision as unlawful or to oblige the commission to grant the deferment.
As a result, the Khmelnytskyi District Administrative Court denied the lawsuit and upheld the commission's decision to refuse the deferment from conscription during mobilization.
The decision may be appealed to the Seventh Administrative Court of Appeal.
Subscribe to our Telegram channel t.me/sudua, Google News SUD.UA Google News SUD.UA, as well as our VIBER and WhatsApp, Facebook Facebook and Instagram Instagram pages to stay informed about the most important events.
