A soldier tried to recognize his illnesses as related to the defense of the Motherland through the court — how the dispute ended

The Second Administrative Court of Appeal left unchanged the decision of the Poltava District Administrative Court, which denied the serviceman's claim against the Central Military Medical Commission of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. The plaintiff demanded a review of the Military Medical Commission's conclusions regarding a number of diagnoses, changes to the disease certificate, and a change in the wording of the causal connection of certain diseases from "related to military service" to "related to the defense of the Fatherland."

The court concluded that the Central Military Medical Commission acted within its powers, examined the submitted medical documents, and did not violate the procedure for considering the appeal. At the same time, the panel of judges emphasized that administrative courts cannot substitute military medical commissions, independently determine diagnoses, stages of diseases, or establish a causal connection between the disease and military service.

Circumstances of the case

A serviceman who participated in combat and sustained multiple injuries and significant health deterioration during service underwent a military medical examination in 2025. Based on the examination results, the hospital Military Medical Commission recognized him unfit for military service and issued the corresponding disease certificate.

Disagreeing with some of the commission's conclusions, the serviceman appealed to the Central Military Medical Commission. He believed that some diagnoses were incompletely reflected or not included in the disease certificate and insisted on changing the causal connection wording for some diseases. In particular, the plaintiff argued that ischemic heart disease and angina pectoris were detected during direct participation in state defense activities and therefore should be formulated as "diseases indeed related to the defense of the Fatherland."

Additionally, he requested a review of the stage of knee joint arthrosis indicated in the certificate, the addition of certain proctological diseases to the list of diagnoses, and changes to some medical formulations. After the Central Military Medical Commission left the decision unchanged, the serviceman turned to the court.

Position of the Central Military Medical Commission

During the review, the Central Military Medical Commission analyzed the submitted medical documentation and concluded that some of the plaintiff's diseases were diagnosed before conscription or had confirmed medical manifestations before participation in combat.

Specifically, the commission found that certain cardiovascular and neurological diseases were recorded before mobilization. Meanwhile, several other diseases were diagnosed after the periods of direct participation in combat. Based on the review, the Central Military Medical Commission found no grounds to change the causal connection of the respective diseases to the wording "diseases indeed related to the defense of the Fatherland" and left the hospital Military Medical Commission's decision unchanged.

What the court noted

The appellate court thoroughly analyzed the legislation on military medical examination and highlighted the limits of judicial control over Military Medical Commission decisions.

The panel of judges emphasized that in such disputes, courts primarily verify the legality of the commissions' decision-making procedures, their compliance with established order and powers. At the same time, the issues of diagnosing, determining disease stages, evaluating medical documents, and establishing causal links between diseases and military service fall within the competence of the Military Medical Commission as a specialized medical body.

The court referred to established Supreme Court practice, according to which courts are not entitled to conduct their own medical assessment of a person's health or replace the conclusions of military medical commissions with their own.

The court drew attention to technical errors

The panel of judges separately noted that legislation allows the Military Medical Commission to correct technical errors in documents formalizing the commission's decision.

This concerns errors in spelling of surnames, first names, patronymics, dates of birth, document details, and other similar information. However, changing a diagnosis, disease stage, or causal connection is not a correction of a technical error and effectively means a review of the medical conclusion, which falls within the competence of the Military Medical Commission.

Why the appeal was rejected

The panel of judges established that the Central Military Medical Commission substantively considered the serviceman's appeal, examined the submitted medical documents, and provided a reasoned response regarding the refusal to change the causal connection of diseases.

The court also found no evidence that the commission ignored any submitted medical documents or violated the decision-making procedure. Thus, the plaintiff did not prove the existence of procedural violations that could be grounds for canceling the disputed protocol of the Central Military Medical Commission.

The appellate court additionally noted that in case of changes or deterioration in health, a person has the right to initiate a repeated medical examination and submit new medical documents. However, this issue did not affect the assessment of the legality of the contested decision of the Central Military Medical Commission in this case.

Conclusion of the court

The Second Administrative Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and left unchanged the decision of the Poltava District Administrative Court in case 440/126/26.

The court confirmed that mere disagreement with the Military Medical Commission's medical conclusions is not grounds for their cancellation. To satisfy such claims, it is necessary to prove procedural violations in decision-making, exceeding the commission's powers, or other legal violations. Meanwhile, the issues of diagnosing, determining disease stages, and their causal connection with military service fall within the exclusive competence of military medical commissions.

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