BAILII
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) >> Salehi v Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors [2025] UKFTT 716 (GRC) (18 June 2025)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKFTT/GRC/2025/716.html
Cite as: [2025] UKFTT 716 (GRC)

[New search] [Printable PDF version] [Help]

Neutral Citation Number: [2025] UKFTT 716 (GRC)
Case Reference: FT.D.2024.0969

First-tier Tribunal
(General Regulatory Chamber)
Standards & Licensing

Determined on the on 17th June 2025
Decision Given On 18 June 2025

B e f o r e :

HHJ DAVID DIXON
____________________

Between:
BANYAMIN SALEHI
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

  1. This appeal concerns a decision of the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors ("the Registrar") made 30th October 2024 to refuse to grant the Appellant a third trainee licence.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. The Appellant now appeals the Registrar's decision.
  5. Appeal to the Tribunal

  6. The Appellant's Notice of Appeal, 11th November 2024, indicates he has been unable during the first two licences to get any more than one test booked. He indicates that his mental health was not where it should have been for that first attempt due to family health issues. He asserts that he is working hard to improve and seeks a further licence to ensure he can pass his test.
  7. 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.
  8. The Registrar indicates that the Appellant failed his first Part 3 attempt on 29th August 2024. Subsequent to the Appeal there was a further failure on 6th March 2025, and the final test was due to take place on 5th June. No information has been given for that test. There were two other tests booked but cancelled by the Appellant.
  9. Mode of Determination

  10. The Appeal was listed for oral determination and the case was heard via the CVP system.
  11. The Appellant did not attend. The Respondent did not attend.
  12. The Tribunal determined that is was appropriate to consider this case in the parties absence as due notice of the hearing had been given. Further, the Appellant had sought to withdraw the Appeal late on 16th June, but the late service of the request, without any detail left the Tribunal feeling that a decision on the papers was the most effective and fair way to proceed. The Appellant's desire not to continue with the Appeal meant that there was no prejudice to him. The Tribunal considered the Rules and came to the clear conclusion that a paper determination was appropriate.
  13. The Tribunal considered a bundle of evidence containing 22 pages.
  14. The Law

  15. 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].
  16. A licence under section 129(1) of the Act is granted:
  17. '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 '.

  18. 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.
  19. 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.
  20. 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.
  21. 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.
  22. Conclusion

  23. The Tribunal considered carefully all the evidence and papers before it.
  24. 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 that there were no real issues, but booking a test slot and getting tests was extremely difficult.
  25. Whilst the Appellant has clearly shown that there were difficulties booking slots, there has been no loss of training opportunity. He has now been licensed for some 18 months already, with the sole issue raised being difficulties in booking tests. I'm afraid I take the view that the Appellant has had long enough to train and the Appeal must fail.
  26. Accordingly I dismiss the appeal with immediate effect.
  27. (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]

About BAILII - FAQ - Copyright Policy - Disclaimers - Privacy Policy amended on 25/11/2010