Zahra Janjua v The Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors
The appeal was struck out because the appellant failed to comply with repeated tribunal directions to provide necessary documents and information.
Source-derived case information.
- Parties
- Appellant: Zahra Janjua; Respondent: The Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Striking Out for Non Compliance With Tribunal Direction
- Outcome
- Appeal struck out
- Legal Topics
- Tribunal Procedure, Appeal Striking Out, Non Compliance With Directions
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Zahra Janjua
Appellant
The Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Striking Out for Non Compliance With Tribunal Direction
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appeal should be struck out for non-compliance with tribunal directions
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal was struck out because the appellant failed to comply with repeated tribunal directions to provide necessary documents and information.
Court Disposition
Appeal struck out
Orders
- The appeal is struck out under rule 8(3)(a) for non-compliance with a Tribunal direction.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Neutral citation number: [2025] UKFTT 01582 (GRC) First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) Transport Case Reference: FT/D/2025/0869/FPP Decided without a hearing Decision given on: 29 December 2025 Before JUDGE HARRIS Between ZAHRA JANJUA and THE REGISTRAR OF APPROVED DRIVING INSTRUCTORS Appellant Respondent Decision: The appeal is struck out under rule 8(3)(a) for non-compliance with a Tribunal direction. REASONS 1. The Appellant lodged an appeal using the GRC1 form on 26 August 2025. The appeal was incomplete as the Appellant did not include a copy of the decision notice they sought to challenge, include details of the regulator at section 4 of the form or provide reasons as to why the appeal was submitted late. 2. By Directions and email dated 27 August 2025 the Appellant was required to provide a copy of the Decision Notice that it wished to challenge to the Tribunal, together with details of the regulator and reasons as to why the appeal was submitted late within 28 days. The Appellant did not comply with that Direction. 3. By Directions dated 3 November 2025, the Appellant was directed by 18 November 2025 to provide a copy of the Decision Notice that it wished to challenge to the Tribunal, together with details of the regulator and reasons as to why the appeal was submitted late. © CROWN COPYRIGHT 2025 4. The Appellant was directed to note that failure to comply with the Direction could lead to the Tribunal striking out the appeal for failure to comply without further direction. 5. The Appellant failed to comply with the Direction dated 3 November 2025 and accordingly there are grounds to strike out the appeal. Signed: Judge Harris Date: 18 December 2025 2