British
and Irish Legal Information Institute
Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information
[
Home]
[
Databases]
[
World Law]
[
Multidatabase Search]
[
Help]
[
Feedback]
First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber)
You are here:
BAILII >>
Databases >>
First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) >>
Thompson v Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors [2025] UKFTT 715 (GRC) (18 June 2025)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKFTT/GRC/2025/715.html
Cite as:
[2025] UKFTT 715 (GRC)
[
New search]
[
Printable PDF version]
[
Help]
|
|
Neutral Citation Number: [2025] UKFTT 715 (GRC) |
|
|
Case Reference: FT.D.2025.111 |
First-tier Tribunal
(General Regulatory Chamber)
Standards & Licensing
|
|
Determined on the on 17th June 2025
|
|
|
Decision Given On 18th June 2025 |
B e f o r e :
HHJ DAVID DIXON
____________________
Between:
|
LAURA THOMPSON
|
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. This decision takes effect on 27th June 2025.
REASONS
Background to Appeal
- This appeal concerns a decision of the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors ("the Registrar") made 6th January 2025 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 then 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, 18th January 2025, indicates that there have been difficulties booking tests, but asserts, "the registrar has refused my lucence due to not showing any evidence of lost training. This is clearly not the situation as I can prove all my training is up to date and continuing with further training." She seeks a further licence.
- 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 11th December 2023. She has failed her Part 3 twice, once in August 2024, and the second in February 2025. A final test is booked for 26th June 2025.
Mode of Determination
- The Appeal was listed for oral determination and the case was heard via the CVP system.
- The Appellant nor the Respondent attended.
- The Tribunal had originally listed this hearing for the 6th June 2025, but moved it today due to the Appellant having personal commitments. Due notice was sent out and accordingly all should have been aware of the hearing. The Tribunal gave anxious consideration of the Tribunal Rules and the overriding objective and came to the view that this case could be determined on the papers. Both sides had advanced their positions, there had already been a considerable delay and a determination was required. The Tribunal determined a fair and effective decision could be reached so proceeded on paper.
- The Tribunal considered a bundle of evidence containing 19 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 evidence and papers before it.
- In fixing a period of 6 month to allow for trainee instructors to progress Parliament must have had in mind that we are all subject to differing life events that affect our ability to undertake certain tasks. Sometimes those events are so unusual or have such a bearing on an individual that it will be entirely appropriate to find that a longer than normal period of time should be allowed to complete a task. Here the Appellant has indicated there is no loss of training opportunity. In fact has asserted she is completely up to date. There is no basis for an extension as a result.
- The Appellant's appeal must fail, however as the final Part 3 attempt is only days away it would be unfair to deprive the Appellant of the final training opportunities before her test. Accordingly this decision will not take effect until 27th June 2025.
- I dismiss the appeal, effective 27th June 2025.
(Signed)
HHJ David Dixon
DATE: 17th 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]