The Territorial Recruitment Center mobilized a man on the day his reservation was issued: the court explained whether such conscription is legal

17:22, 22 June 2026
telegram sharing button
facebook sharing button
viber sharing button
twitter sharing button
whatsapp sharing button
At the time of mobilization, the employee of a critically important enterprise already had a valid reservation and a deferment from conscription.
The Territorial Recruitment Center mobilized a man on the day his reservation was issued: the court explained whether such conscription is legal
Follow the latest news on SUD.UA social networks

The Territorial Recruitment Center (TRC) conscripted a reservist on the very day his reservation was issued. Courts of two instances concluded that such conscription contradicts the law, and the military unit failed to prove the legality of its actions.

The Third Administrative Court of Appeal confirmed the legality of the decision of the court of first instance, which canceled the order on the mobilization of the employee of a critically important enterprise and the order on his enrollment in the personnel lists of the military unit. The court also supported the conclusion on the necessity to register the reservist for special military accounting as a reserved person.

What the dispute was about

The plaintiff worked at an enterprise that in June 2024 was designated by the Ministry of Energy as critically important for the functioning of the economy and ensuring the livelihood of the population during a special period.

On August 6, 2024, the enterprise issued a reservation for the employee, as a result of which he received a deferment from conscription during mobilization until August 6, 2025. On the same day, the TRC issued an order for his conscription into military service, and the military unit enrolled the man in the personnel lists and appointed him to the position of section master of the training support department.

Believing that he was mobilized contrary to the valid reservation, the reservist challenged the actions of the military authorities in court.

What the courts established

The court of first instance concluded that at the time the conscription order was issued, the plaintiff already had a valid deferment from mobilization. Therefore, the court recognized as unlawful and canceled the TRC order regarding his conscription, as well as canceled the military unit's order on his enrollment in the personnel lists. In addition, the TRC was obliged to register the man for special military accounting in accordance with the Procedure for reserving reservists.

The military unit disagreed with this decision and filed an appeal, stating that the mobilization procedure had already been implemented, and the conscription order was issued within the authority and in accordance with the law.

Why the appellate court rejected the appeal

The panel of judges agreed with the conclusions of the district administrative court and emphasized that according to Article 23 of the Law "On Mobilization Preparation and Mobilization," reserved reservists are not subject to conscription during mobilization.

The court found that the plaintiff's reservation was made in the prescribed manner, and his right to deferment was confirmed by the relevant documents. The case materials 160/29683/24 contained an excerpt from the reservation order and information from the electronic military registration document confirming the reservation effective from August 6, 2024. At the same time, the defendants provided no evidence that the reservation decision was canceled or declared illegal.

The appellate court also noted that the plaintiff informed the TRC about his reservation. At the same time, the legislation imposes corresponding obligations not only on the reservist but also on the territorial recruitment and social support centers, which must verify information about persons entitled to deferment.

Court conclusion

The court concluded that the conscription order was issued contrary to the law since at the time of mobilization the plaintiff had a valid reservation and deferment from conscription.

Since the military unit's order to enroll him in the personnel lists was based on an illegal mobilization order, it must also be canceled.

In conclusion, the Third Administrative Court of Appeal dismissed the military unit's appeal and left the decision of the Dnipropetrovsk District Administrative Court unchanged. The ruling came into legal force upon its adoption and is not subject to cassation appeal.

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

XX Congress of Judges of Ukraine – online broadcast – day one