Man with Deafness Recognized as Fit for Military Service: Court Assessed Legality of MMC Decision

Zhytomyr District Administrative Court, in written proceedings, resolved a dispute regarding the legality of the military medical commission's conclusion on the fitness of a conscript for military service and the actions of the Central Military Medical Commission (CMMC) of the Armed Forces of Ukraine during the review of the complaint against such a decision.

Essence of the Case

The plaintiff applied to the court, considering unlawful the decision of the military-medical commission, documented by a certificate dated December 19, 2025, which recognized him as fit for military service, as well as the decision of the CMMC of the Armed Forces of Ukraine dated January 14, 2026, made following the review of his complaint.

According to the case materials, on December 14, 2025, the plaintiff underwent a medical examination by the military-medical commission, which diagnosed: congenital ear malformation, microtia of the right ear, chronic bilateral hearing loss of a deep degree on the right side and severe degree on the left side, with a recommendation for further examination by December 19, 2025.

On December 19, 2025, the plaintiff underwent a repeated medical examination, which established hypertensive syndrome, chronic bilateral sensorineural hearing loss manifesting as complete deafness in the right ear and mild hearing impairment in the left ear, as well as multiple complicated caries. Based on the examination results and relevant articles of the Disease Classification, he was recognized as fit for military service.

The plaintiff argued that the military medical commission (MMC) violated the provisions of the Regulation on Military Medical Expertise in the Armed Forces of Ukraine when making the decision, as the medical assessment did not correspond to his actual health condition and the Disease Classification norms were incorrectly applied. Furthermore, he noted that the CMMC did not provide a properly reasoned decision following the review of his complaint, as the response was in the form of a letter without a full analysis of the medical documentation.

The defendant opposed the claim, arguing that determining the degree of fitness for military service is within the discretionary powers of MMCs. It was also noted that the plaintiff's complaint was reviewed by the CMMC, which confirmed the correctness of the primary commission's conclusions and found no grounds for their cancellation or revision.

Court's Position and Conclusions

After examining case materials No. 240/5625/26, the court noted that according to the Constitution of Ukraine, state authorities and their officials are obliged to act solely on the basis, within the powers, and in the manner prescribed by law.

The legal regulation of military-medical expertise is governed by the Law of Ukraine "On Military Duty and Military Service" and the Regulation on Military Medical Expertise in the Armed Forces of Ukraine, approved by the Ministry of Defense of Ukraine Order No. 402.

The court established that the MMC at the territorial recruitment center conducted a medical examination of the plaintiff and based on its results issued a certificate recognizing him as fit for military service. This decision was made based on the established diagnoses and relevant articles of the Disease Classification.

The court also noted that verification of the correctness of medical conclusions of non-staff military-medical commissions falls within the competence of higher-level MMCs or the CMMC, not the court. The court is not authorized to evaluate medical diagnoses, determine fitness for military service, or substitute specialized medical bodies.

At the same time, the court pointed out that the CMMC, when reviewing the plaintiff's complaint, limited itself to general statements regarding the correctness of the primary MMC's conclusions without providing a detailed analysis of the submitted medical documents or specifying the application of relevant provisions of the Disease Classification. However, such an assessment alone is not grounds for canceling the primary MMC's decision.

The court proceeded from the fact that decisions of regional or CMMCs are subject to judicial appeal, while primary conclusions of MMCs are subject to verification within the administrative procedure of the military-medical expertise system.

In evaluating the parties' arguments, the court also took into account the legal positions of the Supreme Court, according to which the court cannot interfere with the discretionary powers of the MMC regarding diagnosis establishment and determination of fitness for military service, and its powers are limited to verifying compliance with the decision-making procedure.

Considering the above, the court concluded that there are no grounds to satisfy the claim regarding the cancellation of the MMC's decision.

At the same time, the court found that the review of the complaint by the CMMC did not meet the requirements of completeness and proper motivation, and therefore the defendant's actions in this part should be assessed as improper performance of the duty to review the appeal.

Consequently, the court concluded the necessity to oblige the CMMC to reconsider the plaintiff's complaint taking into account the conclusions set forth in the court decision.

The court also noted that according to the provisions of the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine, each party must prove the circumstances it refers to, and the burden of proving the legality of the decision of the authority lies with the defendant.

After evaluating the evidence as a whole, the court decided to partially satisfy the claim, recognizing the inaction of the CMMC regarding the proper review of the complaint as unlawful and obliging it to reconsider the relevant appeal.

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