Barrett v Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors [2025] UKFTT 995 (GRC) (18 August 25)

Neutral Citation Number: [2025] UKFTT 995 (GRC) Case Reference: FT. D.2024.1029 First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) Standards & Licensing Determined on the on 19th June 2025 Decision Given On: 18 Aug. 25 B e f o r e : HHJ DAVID DIXON ____________________ Between: ADAM BARRETT Appellant - and - THE REGISTRAR OF APPROVED DRIVING INSTRUCTORS Respondent ____________________ ____________________ HTML VERSION OF DECISION ____________________ Crown Copyright © Decision: The appeal is dismissed and the Registrar's decision remains. REASONS Background to Appeal This appeal concerns a decision of the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors ("the Registrar") made 19 th November 2024 to refuse to grant the Appellant a third trainee licence. The Appellant is a trainee driving instructor who was granted a trainee licence under s.129 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 [1] ('the Act') for a six-month period, and another, but was refused a further licence at the end of the relevant period. The Registrar's reasons for refusal, in summary, were that the Appellant had not passed the final part of the ADI qualifying examination within the relevant period and as insufficient evidence of loss of training time was supplied that the Appellant had had long enough to progress, and the application to issue a third trainee licence was therefore refused. The Appellant now appeals the Registrar's decision. Appeal to the Tribunal The Appellant's Notice of Appeal, 25 th November 2024, indicates "I have only had 1 test for my part 3 and not had 3 attempts. I've had a test on hold and have it on the 2 nd December." No further details are set out. The Respondent submitted a Response indicating that the decision letter sets out their position. The Registrar points out that the Applicant had sufficient time to progress. The Registrar indicates that the Appellant has been licenced to instruct as a trainee since 23 rd October 2023. He has failed his Part 3 twice, not fully completed a Part 3 once, and as at the date of the printout at p 20 of the bundle had not booked a further test. He is rapidly approaching his 2 year cut-off date. Mode of Determination The Appeal was listed for a paper determination, both parties having agreed to the same. The Tribunal considered the papers and all of the materials therein and came to the view that a fair and just determination could be reached without oral evidence and therefore considered the case as requested, in accordance with the Tribunal Rules and procedures. The Tribunal considered a bundle of evidence containing 20 pages. The Law The grant of a trainee licence enables applicants to provide instruction for payment before they are qualified. The circumstances in which trainee licences may be granted are set out in s. 129 of the Act and the Motor Cars (Driving Instruction) Regulations 2005 [2] . A licence under section 129(1) of the Act is granted: 'for the purpose of enabling a person to acquire practical experience in giving instruction in driving motor cars with a view to undergoing such part of the examination… as consists of a practical test of ability and fitness to instruct '. In order to qualify as an Approved Driving Instructor, applicants must pass the Qualifying Examination. This comprises: the written examination ('Part 1'); the driving ability and fitness test ('Part 2'); and the instructional ability and fitness test ('Part 3'). Three attempts are permitted at each part. The whole examination must be completed within 2 years of passing Part 1, failing which the whole examination has to be retaken. If a candidate has passed part 2, they may be granted a trainee licence. However, holding a trainee licence is not a prerequisite to qualification as an Approved Driving Instructor and many people qualify as an Approved Driving Instructor without having held a trainee licence. The powers of the Tribunal in determining this appeal are set out in s. 131 of the Act. The Tribunal may make such order as it thinks fit. When making its Decision, the Tribunal stands in the shoes of the Registrar of approved Driving Instructors and takes a fresh decision on the evidence available to it, giving appropriate weight to the Registrar's decision [3] as the person tasked by Parliament with making such decisions. The burden of proof in satisfying the Tribunal that the Registrar's decision was wrong rests with the Appellant. Conclusion The Tribunal considered carefully all the papers before it. Parliament set a six month period as the appropriate timescale during which trainee instructors could obtain the relevant training required to pass their Part 3 examinations. Discretion was built into the system to allow the Registrar to extend that period where something outside of the norm was put forward, that justified extra time. Here it is suggested that it was difficult to get a test, albeit the Tribunal notes that 3 dates have been given during the licensed period. There is no suggestion that there was a lack of training opportunity. There is no real basis to seek an extension, and certainly none that justifies granting one. The Appellant has had plenty of time to learn how to instruct and indeed tried a number of times to pass the required tests. He has now been licensed for 19 months, well in excess of Parliament's intended period. The Tribunal wishes the Appellant well if he chooses to take his final attempt at his examination. However, this Appeal is dismissed with immediate effect. (Signed) HHJ David Dixon DATE: 19 th June 2025 Note 1 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/52/part/V/crossheading/licences [Back] Note 2 http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2005/1902/pdfs/uksi_20051902_en.pdf [Back] Note 3 See R (Hope and Glory Public House Limited) v City of Westminster Magistrates' Court [2011] EWCA Civ 31 . http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2011/31.html. Approved by the Supreme Court in Hesham Ali (Iraq) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] UKSC 60 at paragraph 45 – see https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2015-0126-judgment.pdf. [Back] BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII