The Territorial Recruitment Center fined a military reservist 25,500 UAH but failed to prove the summons was sent

The Desniansky District Court of Kyiv canceled the decision of the Territorial Recruitment and Social Support Center to impose a fine of 25,500 UAH on a military reservist under part 3 of article 210-1 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses and closed the case due to the absence of an administrative offense in his actions. The court concluded that the defendant did not provide sufficient evidence confirming the legality of holding the person administratively liable.

Case circumstances

The plaintiff appealed the decision of the head of the Territorial Recruitment Center dated February 27, 2026, which fined him 25,500 UAH under part 3 of article 210-1 of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offenses for failing to appear upon summons on December 29, 2025. The decision stated that the summons was sent by registered mail, and failure to appear at the Territorial Recruitment Center was considered a violation of the legislation on mobilization preparation and mobilization.

The plaintiff denied committing the offense and insisted that the decision was unlawful.

The court reviewed the case in a simplified procedure without summoning the parties. Although the defendant was properly notified about the hearing and received a copy of the ruling on the commencement of proceedings along with the claim, he did not submit a response to the claim nor provide the court with evidence supporting the legality of his decision.

What the court established

The court noted that according to the Code of Administrative Procedure, the burden of proving the legality of the contested decision lies with the authority exercising public powers.

At the same time, the case materials, as established by the court, do not contain confirmation that the summons was actually sent to the plaintiff or to which address it was sent. Additionally, there was no certificate from JSC "Ukrposhta" regarding reasons for return or redelivery of the postal item that could confirm the circumstances of delivery or return of the letter to the sender.

One decision is not enough

The court separately emphasized that the decision to hold a person administratively liable cannot be the sole evidence of the person's guilt.

Besides this decision, the defendant did not submit any evidence confirming the plaintiff's violation of the legislation on mobilization preparation and mobilization. Since the defendant did not prove the presence of an administrative offense in the plaintiff's actions and did not provide proper evidence, the court recognized the fact of the offense as unproven.

The court also noted that failure by the authority to submit a response without valid reasons, according to part 4 of article 159 of the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine, may be regarded as acceptance of the claim. In this case 754/6497/26, the defendant did not exercise his right to submit objections or evidence confirming the legality of the decision.

The court applied the presumption of innocence principle

In its decision, the court emphasized that the presumption of innocence principle also applies to cases of administrative offenses.

The court referred to the Constitution of Ukraine and the practice of the European Court of Human Rights, stating that all doubts regarding the occurrence of the offense and the person's guilt must be interpreted in their favor. The court also stressed that both citizens and territorial recruitment and social support centers are obliged to act in accordance with the law, and during the consideration of administrative offense cases, the authority must thoroughly investigate the circumstances and collect proper evidence.

Court decision

The Desniansky District Court of Kyiv satisfied the administrative claim, canceled the Territorial Recruitment Center's decision to impose a fine of 25,500 UAH, closed the administrative offense case due to the absence of an administrative offense in the plaintiff's actions, and recovered 665.60 UAH of court fees from the defendant at the expense of budget allocations in favor of the plaintiff.

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 informed about the most important events.