A man weighing 143 kg tried to get a court order to prevent his mobilization

The Kharkiv District Administrative Court denied a request by a conscript—who suffers from grade III obesity and other serious medical conditions—to temporarily block his forced mobilization. The man also requested a ban on his detention, transport to the territorial recruitment center, and assignment to a military unit.

In his complaint, he argued that conducting mobilization procedures before the completion of his medical examination could pose a threat to his health and life. However, the court did not grant his requests.

The plaintiff challenged the actions of the territorial recruitment centers related to his registration for military service in Kharkiv and the conduct of mobilization activities. Separately, he filed a motion with the court for a preliminary injunction, requesting that the relevant actions be prohibited until the decision in the case takes effect.

The man justified his request, in particular, by citing his health condition. According to him, he has grade III obesity, weighs 143 kg, and has a body mass index of 44.1. He also reported having undergone four abdominal surgeries on his intestines and abdominal wall, a recurrent postoperative hernia, and other chronic conditions.

An additional argument raised by the plaintiff was his “Wanted” status in the “Reserve+” app. He feared that this could lead to his detention and forced mobilization before the conclusion of the court proceedings and the necessary medical examination.

The court concluded that the man had failed to demonstrate sufficient legal grounds for a temporary injunction against mobilization measures. In particular, the plaintiff failed to provide adequate evidence that, without such interim measures, the enforcement of a future court decision or the effective protection of his rights would be significantly impeded or rendered impossible.

The court also noted that the plaintiff did not specify the group of individuals who should be prohibited from taking the relevant actions. In the court’s view, the “Wanted” status in the “Reserve+” app does not, in and of itself, indicate a violation of his rights.

The court emphasized that interim relief cannot substitute for a hearing on the merits of the case. The legality of the TCC’s actions, which the man is challenging, must still be assessed during the hearing of the main claim.

By a ruling dated October 16, 2026, in Case No. 520/30634/26, the Kharkiv District Administrative Court denied the motion for a preliminary injunction. This decision does not constitute a final ruling on the legality of the TCC’s contested actions: the court has yet to consider the main dispute. The ruling may be appealed.

This was reported by the “Judicial and Legal Gazette.”

Who is eligible for a deferment from mobilization in Ukraine starting November 1.

Mobilization in Ukraine in May 2026: Who May Be Called Up First.

As a reminder, parents with multiple children in Ukraine are entitled to a deferment from mobilization, but this is not automatically guaranteed.

Meanwhile, the head of the National Police stated that law enforcement officers’ participation in mobilization activities is not their direct duty and has negative consequences. According to him, this practice affects the public’s perception of the police.