Case Summary
A United Kingdom citizen who graduated from the private higher education institution International European University in General Medicine contacted Disputes Law Firm after more than fourteen months of trying to obtain his apostilled degree documents. He had completed the full curriculum and earned the right to a Doctor of Medicine degree. The university tied the release of his diploma to a procedure that it had itself completed long before, and it issued the documents only within the deadline set by a formal pre-trial demand.
The Client's Problem
The client studied General Medicine at the university from January 2019 to August 2024. He passed both national licensing examinations, KROK 1 and KROK 2, and received academic transcripts for every year of study. On that basis he became entitled to his Doctor of Medicine diploma and the diploma supplement.
The university made the release of the documents conditional on the recognition (nostrification) of the client's earlier bachelor's degree, which he had obtained in India. Until that procedure was complete, the university said, it could not issue his degree documents.
The client provided his bachelor's diploma, and the university initiated the recognition procedure itself: it filed the application with the competent authority in its own name and acted as the applicant. Because the university was the applicant, the result of the procedure came to the university first.
The Delay
Once the procedure had started, the university stopped updating the client on its progress and either ignored his inquiries or answered them vaguely. The recognition itself took about five months: the client finished his studies in August 2024, and in early January 2025 the competent authority issued the recognition certificate and handed the original to the university's representative as the applicant.
The obstacle the university relied on was therefore removed in early January 2025, and the university, as the applicant, knew it from that moment. Even so, for roughly the next sixteen months, until the diploma was issued after the demand, the university did not tell the client the procedure was complete, took no steps to issue his degree documents, and kept attributing the delay to unfinished recognition.
Without information from the university, the client looked into the matter himself, contacting the institution that had issued his earlier degree and the authority that handled the recognition. The authority officially confirmed to him the date on which the recognition certificate had been issued.
To leave no grounds for further refusal, the client went through the recognition procedure again on his own, obtained a duplicate certificate and sent it to the university. The university acknowledged receipt of the duplicate recognition certificate, yet it still did not issue his degree documents.
Legal Position and Steps Taken
Before turning to lawyers, the client had already filed a complaint with the Education Ombudsman, as well as a complaint that was referred to the Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine, and both were still pending. The next step was a formal pre-trial demand addressed directly to the university, setting out the chronology, the legal grounds and a deadline of five business days from receipt.
The demand addressed one question: may a university withhold degree documents once a graduate has completed the program and the recognition procedure is finished? Article 5(2) of the Law of Ukraine "On Higher Education" (Закон України «Про вищу освіту») provides that obtaining higher education at each level requires successful completion of the educational program, which is the basis for awarding the corresponding degree. Article 7(1) of the same Law provides that a higher education document is issued to a person who has successfully completed the relevant program and passed the final assessment. The client's right to his diploma therefore arose when he completed the curriculum and passed the assessment, and it did not depend on the university's discretion.
Article 53 of the Constitution of Ukraine guarantees everyone the right to education, while Articles 21 and 22 establish that human rights are inalienable and inviolable. Withholding a graduate's degree after the only stated obstacle had been removed was inconsistent with these provisions. Articles 15 and 16 of the Civil Code of Ukraine give a person the right to protect a violated right, including in court, and the demand stated that this would be the consequence of failing to comply by the deadline.
Outcome
The university responded within the five business days set by the demand. Its representative contacted the client, sent photographs of the already apostilled documents and arranged their shipment, and the client received the apostilled original of his Doctor of Medicine diploma.
The university had delayed the documents for more than fourteen months and then issued them within five business days of the demand, which shows that by the time the demand was sent nothing stood in the way of their release.
Conclusion
A higher education institution must issue degree documents to a person who has completed the program and passed the final assessment, and once a procedural obstacle is removed it has no legal basis for further delay. A reference to unfinished formalities does not release the institution from this obligation, and the graduate may demand the documents and go to court if refused.
In this case, a pre-trial demand setting out the chronology, the legal grounds and a clear deadline secured the release of the documents without litigation.
Disputes Law Firm represents graduates and students in disputes with Ukrainian universities over the issuance of degree documents, recognition of foreign qualifications and apostille certification. Our work starts with a review of the documents and a formal pre-trial demand, and if the institution does not respond, continues with complaints to government oversight bodies and a claim in court.
