Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
England and Wales decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Tribunal dismissed an appeal against removal from the Register of Approved Driving Instructors after three speeding offences were found to show the appellant was no longer fit and proper.
The Tribunal dismissed an appeal against refusal of a fourth trainee driving instructor licence, noting the appellant’s Part 3 test window had expired.
The Tribunal dismissed Mr Abbas’s appeal against refusal of a third trainee driving instructor licence, finding insufficient evidence that illness prevented progress over 19 months.
The tribunal dismissed Mr Amine’s appeal against refusal of a third trainee driving instructor licence, confirming the respondent’s decision.
The First-tier Tribunal dismissed Mark Jason Turnbull’s appeal against refusal of a third trainee driving instructor licence, upholding the Respondent’s 30 March 2026 decision.
The Tribunal allowed an ADI’s appeal against removal from the register, finding insufficient proof he was properly notified of the final Standards Check.
The Tribunal dismissed Nicholas Skaliotis’s appeal against removal from the ADI Register, finding he had been given more than reasonable opportunity to pass the standards check.
The First-tier Tribunal dismissed an appeal against refusal of a third trainee driving instructor licence, finding the decision fair, reasonable and proportionate.
The First-tier Tribunal dismissed Cihan Carcabuk’s appeal and refused entry to the Approved Driving Instructors Register after his conviction for failing to identify a driver.
The appellant, having received 6 penalty points for a CU80 offence, does not meet the statutory requirement to be a fit and proper person to remain on the Register of Approved Driving Instructors. There are no exceptional circumstances to justify departure from the Registrar's decision, and the appellant's arguments did not demonstrate sufficient understanding of the gravity of the offence or its impact on public perception.
Source excerpt
Explore more
