The Territorial Recruitment Centre stated that it has no right to issue sailors a permit to leave the country — the court recognized such refusal as illegal

The Zhytomyr District Administrative Court recognized the refusal of the Territorial Recruitment and Social Support Center (TRSSC) to issue a sailor a permit to leave their place of residence, as provided by the Rules for Crossing the State Border and necessary for crossing the state border during martial law, as unlawful. The court concluded that the current Rules explicitly require sailors to obtain such a permit from the TRSSC, and the defendant's claim of lacking authority to issue the relevant document is unfounded. At the same time, the court did not oblige the immediate issuance of the permit but ordered a reconsideration of the applicant's request taking into account its legal conclusions.

The sailor applied to the TRSSC for a permit

The plaintiff, who was heading to work on a sea vessel, applied to the TRSSC on March 31, 2026, with a request to issue the permit provided for in subparagraph 3 of paragraph 2-12 of the Rules for Crossing the State Border by Ukrainian citizens.

He attached to the application a military registration document, a sailor's identity card, an employment contract, and confirmation from the Ukrainian Shipping Administration — documents explicitly specified by the Rules for this category of persons.

However, the TRSSC refused the applicant by letter, stating that paragraph 2-12 of Rule No. 57 does not provide for the head of the Territorial Recruitment and Social Support Center to issue a permit for crossing the state border, and the legislation does not empower the TRSSC to issue a document with such a name. The defendant also emphasized that the issue of allowing persons to cross the state border falls within the competence of the State Border Guard Service of Ukraine.

What the court established

After examining the case materials, the court noted that during martial law, citizens' right to leave Ukraine may be restricted by law. At the same time, the Cabinet of Ministers, by Resolution No. 992, established a special procedure for crossing the state border for certain categories of sailors.

In particular, paragraph 2-12 of the Rules for Crossing the State Border allows men aged 18 to 60 to leave for work on sea vessels or for practical training, provided they submit the specified list of documents.

The Rules explicitly state that after receiving confirmation from the Shipping Administration, such persons must personally apply to the TRSSC and obtain a permit to leave their place of residence from the head of the respective TRSSC to present to authorized officers of the State Border Guard Service when crossing the state border.

The court also noted that in implementation of the Cabinet of Ministers' resolution, in October 2022, the Acting Chief of Staff — Deputy Commander of the Land Forces of the Armed Forces of Ukraine approved the Procedure for issuing such a permit. The document defines the list of necessary documents, the procedure for their verification, processing times, grounds for refusal, and also contains the form of the permit itself.

The defendant did not provide the court with any evidence that the mentioned procedure was revoked or lost its validity. Therefore, the court found the TRSSC's arguments about the absence of an approved procedure or permit form to be unfounded.

Moreover, the court noted that the plaintiff submitted all documents necessary to confirm the grounds for leaving the country as a person heading to work on a sea vessel when applying to the TRSSC. Under these circumstances, the refusal, motivated solely by the alleged lack of authority of the TRSSC, contradicts the current regulatory framework.

Why the court did not oblige immediate issuance of the permit

At the same time, the court denied the claim to directly oblige the TRSSC to issue the permit.

The court explained that it is the Territorial Recruitment Center that must verify whether all conditions provided by law for issuing such a permit have been met. This assessment falls within the competence of the administrative body, and the court does not have the right to substitute its powers and make decisions on its behalf.

However, if the refusal is based on incorrect application of the law, the court may recognize it as unlawful and oblige the body to reconsider the application. This is the method of protection the court applied in this case. It emphasized that during the new consideration, the TRSSC must provide an objective assessment of the grounds for issuing the permit, taking into account the conclusions set out in the decision.

Court decision

The Zhytomyr District Administrative Court partially satisfied the claim. The court recognized the TRSSC's refusal to issue the plaintiff a permit to leave the place of residence, as provided by subparagraph 3 of paragraph 2-12 of the Rules for Crossing the State Border by Ukrainian citizens, as unlawful. In addition, the court obliged the TRSSC to reconsider the plaintiff's application taking into account the legal assessment set out in the decision.

At the same time, the court refused to oblige the TRSSC to immediately issue the permit, as such a decision must be made by the body itself after reconsidering the application and verifying that the applicant has met all the conditions provided by law.

The court also ordered the defendant to pay the plaintiff 1,064.96 UAH in court fees at the expense of the budget allocations.

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