The Military Medical Commission Recognized a Man Previously Removed from Military Registration as Fit: Was the Conclusion Successfully Challenged?

The Second Administrative Court of Appeal dismissed the lawsuit of a man who requested to cancel the MMC's conclusion about his fitness for military service, restore the information about his removal from military registration, and make the corresponding changes to the Unified State Register of conscripts, those liable for military service, and reservists. The court concluded that in this case the plaintiff should have first used the procedure provided by Regulation No. 402 to review the MMC decision in higher-level commissions, and only after obtaining the relevant decision, appealed to the court.

Case Circumstances

The plaintiff had a temporary certificate of a person liable for military service issued in 2021, according to which he was recognized unfit for military service and removed from military registration.

In August 2025, the Poltava District Administrative Court in another case recognized the inaction of the Territorial Recruitment Center (TRC) as unlawful for not entering into the Unified State Register of conscripts, those liable for military service, and reservists the information about the plaintiff's removal from military registration back in 2021 and obliged to make the corresponding entry.

However, even before this decision came into legal force, on April 9, 2025, the plaintiff underwent a new medical examination. The non-staff permanent MMC issued a certificate recognizing him fit for military service during a special period. Based on this, the man was registered for military service and issued a military ID. It was these actions that he challenged in a new administrative proceeding.

Plaintiff's Position

In the appeal, the plaintiff stated that at the time of undergoing the MMC, he was already a person removed from military registration and therefore did not belong to the category of persons subject to military medical examination as liable for military service.

He also argued that the absence of the corresponding entry in the Register does not change his legal status but only indicates the TRC's improper fulfillment of the duty to timely enter the information.

Furthermore, the plaintiff believed that the court of first instance incorrectly assessed the 2021 MMC decision by applying the version of Regulation No. 402 and the Schedule of Diseases that were already in effect in 2025.

Why the Appellate Court Refused

The panel of judges agreed with the decision of the court of first instance and dismissed the lawsuit.

The court noted that the Regulation on Military Medical Examination provides a special mechanism for reviewing MMC decisions. In this case, the court concluded that the plaintiff should have first filed a complaint with a higher-level MMC and only after completing this procedure, if there was a relevant decision, appealed it in court.

The appellate court established that the plaintiff did not provide evidence of appealing to the regional MMC or the Central Military Medical Commission regarding the review of the conclusion dated April 9, 2025.

According to the court, failure to comply with the procedure for reviewing the MMC decision provided by Regulation No. 402 was an independent ground for refusing to satisfy the claim. The panel referred, in particular, to the legal conclusions of the Supreme Court set out in rulings dated February 26, 2025, in cases No. 600/3273/22-a and No. 240/13173/22.

Limits of Judicial Review of MMC Decisions

The appellate court also recalled the established practice of the Supreme Court, according to which an administrative court is not entitled to independently assess the correctness of the MMC's medical conclusions or determine a person's fitness for military service.

The subject of judicial control is primarily compliance with the procedure for making the decision. Meanwhile, establishing a diagnosis, determining the degree of fitness for military service, and applying the Schedule of Diseases fall within the powers of military medical commissions, not the court.

Regarding Entries in the Register

The court also denied the request to remove information about the MMC decision from the Unified State Register of conscripts, those liable for military service, and reservists.

The panel noted that the MMC decision dated April 9, 2025, remained valid, and there was no information about its cancellation or review in the prescribed manner. Under these circumstances of case No. 440/1355/26, the court concluded that there were no grounds to exclude the relevant information from the Register, and the bodies maintaining the Register must take into account the valid MMC decision when conducting military registration.

Court Decision

The Second Administrative Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and left the decision of the Poltava District Administrative Court unchanged. The ruling came into legal force on the day of its adoption and is not subject to cassation appeal, except in cases provided for in paragraph 2 of part 5 of article 328 of the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine.

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