A man was removed from the military register — on age grounds or on the conclusion of a military medical board. A year or two went by. Then in Reserve+ he sees himself listed as liable for military service, and sometimes marked "wanted". Nobody told him anything, and he has no decision in hand. We handle such cases in court, and every one of them contains the same error: the ground for removal never went away, but the person was "put back" into the register without a decision and without notice. Below is why this happens, how removal differs from deregistration (the two words are confused even at recruitment centres), and what to do step by step.

Removal and deregistration are not the same thing

Article 37 of the Law "On Military Duty and Military Service" distinguishes two different actions with different consequences. Deregistration is temporary: a person is taken off the register at one recruitment centre (TCC) in order to be registered at another. Removal is final: the person ceases to be liable for military service.

Scroll the diagram sideways →

Where the "return" to the register comes from

The Oberih register — officially the Unified State Register of Conscripts, Persons Liable for Military Service and Reservists — is maintained under a separate law and the Procedure for organising and maintaining military registration. Since 2025 the register has been filled automatically: men aged 25 to 60 about whom the register has no information are registered on the basis of data from the State Migration Service, the tax authority and other state databases — without a medical board and without having to appear.

In practice this produces three typical scenarios.

1. The removal happened but was never entered in the register. The person was removed "on paper" — there is a stamp in the military ID, but no line in the electronic register. The automatic data exchange sees a man of conscription age with no registration and registers him as new.
2. The removal was entered as deregistration. The operator chose the wrong ground. Seven days later the system assumes the person failed to register at a new place.
3. The removal was "cancelled" without a decision. The recruitment centre decided the medical board conclusion was out of date and changed the status without issuing any document or notifying anyone.

Our position in these cases

In every case we prove three things.

• The ground for removal has not been cancelled. The medical board's conclusion of unfitness with removal from the register, or reaching the age limit, has not gone anywhere. There is neither a new medical board conclusion nor a decision cancelling the earlier one.
• A decision to put the person back on the register does not exist, or is not being shown. On request, the recruitment centre must produce the document on the basis of which the status was changed. If the answer comes down to "the data was updated automatically", that confirms there is no decision.
• The person was not notified. Even if there were grounds, changing a person's legal status without notice deprives them of the right to challenge it in time. That in itself is a violation.

The courts already apply the same approach to the "wanted" status. In a judgment of 7 April 2026 in case No. 380/23839/25, the Lviv District Administrative Court held that entering "wanted" data without a ruling on an administrative offence was unlawful and ordered the recruitment centre to correct the register (the judgment is under appeal). The Donetsk (No. 200/5197/25) and Dnipropetrovsk (No. 160/23837/25) District Administrative Courts took the same view back in October 2025: without a ruling that has taken effect, there are no grounds to enter information about an offence in the register. The logic carries over to the "return" of removed persons: the register reflects decisions; it does not replace them.

What to do: step by step

Typical claims:

• to declare unlawful the recruitment centre's actions in entering or changing information about the claimant in the register;
• to order the recruitment centre to enter information about removal from the military register — and to delete the information about being registered, about an offence, about being wanted;
• if necessary, an application for interim measures, so that while the case is heard the recruitment centre takes no notification measures and passes no data to the police.

In our requests to recruitment centres we deliberately do not set out our own version of events: a short request of a few points, so that the centre states the facts itself — and only then do we decide whether to go to court. The firm handles such cases in Poltava and resolves them in court: from a lawyer's request to an administrative court judgment ordering the register to be corrected.

Three mistakes that make things worse

Frequently asked questions

I was removed on age grounds at 60, but Reserve+ still shows an "offence". Is that lawful?

Automatic removal on age grounds does not cancel offences recorded before the date of removal: fines and "wanted" information for past periods remain. But registration itself can no longer be maintained. A fine is challenged or paid separately; for the "wanted" status — an application to the recruitment centre to lift it and, if refused, a claim; the argument is that the time limit for imposing a penalty has expired and there is no ruling.

My military ID has a removal stamp, but the recruitment centre says "it's not in the database". Who is right?

The stamp in the military ID is a document issued by the recruitment centre itself. The register has to reflect documents, not the other way round. A missing line in the register is an error by the body maintaining it, which it must correct on your application. If it refuses, that is the subject of a claim.

Can I be mobilised while the case is in court?

Formally, as long as the register lists you as liable for service, the risk exists. That is why an application for interim measures is filed together with the claim: we ask the court to prohibit the recruitment centre from taking notification and call-up measures against you until the case is decided. Courts grant such applications when there is a document on removal.

Do I need to go to the recruitment centre in person?

No. The request and the application are filed in writing — by post with a list of enclosures, or through a lawyer. Turning up in person without a written document leaves no trace and proves nothing, and only adds risk on the spot.

How long does such a case take in court?

Cases on correcting register data are heard under the simplified procedure, usually without summoning the parties: two to four months at first instance. An appeal by the recruitment centre adds a few more months, but interim measures remain in force all that time.

In short

Removal from the register is final; deregistration is temporary. If your removal was entered as deregistration, the system treats you as an offender. Since 2025 the register has been filled automatically from state databases, and people with no line in Oberih are registered without a medical board. Putting someone back on the register is a decision, not a technical operation: no decision and no notice — the return is groundless. The sequence: screenshots, removal documents, a written request, an application to correct the data, an administrative claim with interim measures. Do not go through a medical board again voluntarily, and do not pay to have the "wanted" status lifted.