Soldier wounded at the front died of brain cancer: dispute arose over the connection of death with the defense of the Fatherland

The Third Administrative Court of Appeal concluded that the Central Military Medical Commission of the Armed Forces of Ukraine improperly reviewed the complaint of the deceased serviceman's family and did not provide proper reasoning for its decision. The court recognized the decision of the Central Military Medical Commission as unlawful, canceled it, and obliged the commission to reconsider the issue of the causal link between the illness and death taking into account the court's conclusions. At the same time, the court did not independently establish the causal link between the death and the defense of the Fatherland, as this falls within the competence of the Military Medical Commission.

Circumstances of the case

The mother of the serviceman, who served under mobilization in 2022–2023 and took direct part in measures to ensure the defense of Ukraine in the Kharkiv region, applied to the court. In June 2022, during mortar and tank shelling by Russian troops, he sustained a blast injury and a penetrating shrapnel wound to the chest. A service investigation established that the injury was received while performing military service duties in defense of the Fatherland.

After prolonged treatment, the serviceman was discharged due to health reasons. In April 2024, he died. According to medical documents, the cause of death was a malignant neoplasm of the temporal lobe of the brain.

In May 2024, the 20th Regional Military Medical Commission determined that the disease leading to the serviceman's death and the cause of death were related to military service. At the same time, the deceased's wife, through a lawyer, appealed this conclusion to the Central Military Medical Commission, believing that the commission should have established a different causal link — with the defense of the Fatherland.

What the Central Military Medical Commission decided

In October 2024, the Central Military Medical Commission agreed with the regional commission's conclusion that the disease leading to the serviceman's death was related to military service. However, the commission found no grounds to establish a causal link in the formulation "related to the defense of the Fatherland."

The serviceman's mother applied to the court, indicating that the Central Military Medical Commission did not properly collect and investigate all circumstances of the case, did not provide a reasoned response to the arguments of the complaint, and in fact did not verify the issues raised by the applicant.

Conclusions of the appellate court

The panel of judges emphasized that the issue of establishing a causal link between illness, injury, or death belongs to the competence of military medical commissions. Courts cannot substitute the Military Medical Commission and independently resolve medical issues but have the right to verify whether the commission's decision was made legally, reasonably, and in accordance with the established procedure.

The court concluded that the Central Military Medical Commission essentially did not consider the substance of the complaint's arguments. The appellate court noted that the commission commented on issues that were not the subject of the complaint and did not provide a proper response to the main arguments of the applicant regarding the possible connection of the disease with measures to defend the Fatherland.

Moreover, the court noted that the decision of the Central Military Medical Commission lacks sufficient justification. The commission merely agreed with the conclusions of the regional commission but did not provide specific factual and legal grounds for rejecting the applicant's arguments. According to the court, motivation is a mandatory requirement for decisions of authorities, as it allows a person to understand the reasons for the decision and effectively appeal it.

The appellate court also noted that the Central Military Medical Commission did not take actions aimed at obtaining additional documents from the military unit and healthcare institutions, did not verify the available information in the electronic healthcare system, and did not properly assess the documents submitted by the serviceman's family representative.

The court specifically emphasized that even if the issue of causal link belongs to the discretionary powers of the Central Military Medical Commission, this does not exempt the commission from the obligation to properly motivate its decisions and thoroughly investigate the circumstances of the case. The absence of such justification deprives a person of the opportunity to understand the reasons for refusal and makes effective judicial control over the authority's activities impossible.

Court decision

The Third Administrative Court of Appeal partially satisfied the appeal of the serviceman's mother, canceled the decision of the Central Military Medical Commission recorded in protocol No. 7511 dated October 18, 2024, and recognized it as unlawful.

At the same time, in case 160/11306/25, the court refused to independently determine the causal link between the disease, the serviceman's death, and the defense of the Fatherland, as this falls within the discretionary powers of the Military Medical Commission. Instead, the Central Military Medical Commission was obliged to reconsider the issue of the causal link of the disease that led to the serviceman's death and the cause of his death, taking into account the appellate court's conclusions.

Additionally, the court ordered the Central Military Medical Commission of the Armed Forces of Ukraine to pay the plaintiff 3,028 UAH from budget funds as court fees for filing the lawsuit and appeal.

The ruling came into legal force upon adoption and may be appealed to the Supreme Court in cassation procedure.

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