Appeal administrative courts started take into account the data of “Ukrposhta” to check the fact of receipt of summons by conscripts. When considering cases of fines imposed by territorial collection centers, the courts analyze the movement of postal items and reveal important details.
Although the government allocated funding for the printing and delivery of summonses issued through the “Oberig” registry, not all shipments reach the addressees — and not always due to the conscripts themselves. According to the procedure, summonses are generated automatically on the basis of data from the register, printed and sent by letters through “Ukrposhta”. In the fall of 2024, it became known that by the end of the year, it is planned to print 900,000 summonses.
Director General of “Ukrposhta” Ihor Smilyanskyi reported that in October 2024, more than 20,000 summonses were handed over for delivery. At the same time, he emphasized that the quality of the delivery of the summons clearly correlates with the quality of the address that was provided in the “Rezerv+” or “Oberig” system.
“By the way, there is even an address — Melitopol. It is clear that now, unfortunately, we cannot deliver the summons there.” – explained Ihor Smilyanskyi.
The TCC noted that the new legislative changes required conscripts to update their credentials within 60 days, in particular through the “Reserve+” application. This made it possible to collect up-to-date information about the place of residence of persons, according to which summonses are sent. If the registered item is not delivered, the letter together with the notification of delivery is returned to the TCC with an indication of the reason.
However, judicial practice testified that in a number of cases the very procedure of serving subpoenas was violated. Thus, the Eighth Administrative Court of Appeal found that the summons was returned due to the “absence of the addressee at the specified address” on October 15, 2024, while the appearance at the TCC was scheduled for October 14. That is, the shipment returned the next day after the specified date. In the decision of February 18, 2025 in case No. 162/999/24, the court recognized that the plaintiff was not properly notified.
A similar situation was recorded in the case considered by the Third Administrative Court of Appeal (decision dated February 28, 2025 in case No. 396/11/25). Here, the letter was returned due to “missing addressee”, and no evidence was provided that the man knew about the shipment. At the same time, the court found that on the day the letter arrived, the post office was closed, the next day it worked only for a few hours, and later, on Tuesday, the shipment was returned to the TCC.
As a result, in both cases, the courts canceled the fines imposed by the TCC. It is worth noting that both men were not subject to mobilization – one had a deferment, the other has been a person with a disability since 2014. At the same time, the courts paid attention specifically to the violation of the notification procedure.
We would like to remind you that a fine of 17,000 hryvnias is provided for violating the legislation on military accounting. Bank accounts may be blocked in case of non-payment.
