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) >>
Ahmad v Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors [2025] UKFTT 229 (GRC) (25 February 2025)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKFTT/GRC/2025/229.html
Cite as:
[2025] UKFTT 229 (GRC)
[
New search]
[
Printable PDF version]
[
Help]
|
|
Neutral Citation Number: [2025] UKFTT 229 (GRC) |
|
|
Appeal Number: FT/D/2024/0784 |
First-tier Tribunal
(General Regulatory Chamber) Transport
|
|
Determined on the paper and
|
|
|
Decision Given On 25 February 2025 |
B e f o r e :
JUDGE OF THE FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL B. KENNEDY KC
____________________
Between:
|
FARID AHMAD
|
Appellant
|
|
- and -
|
|
|
REGISTRAR OF APPROVED DRIVING INSTRUCTORS
|
Respondent
|
____________________
____________________
HTML VERSION OF DECISION
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
DECISION
- The appeal is dismissed and the respondent's decision of 04 September 2024 is confirmed.
REASONS
- The Appellant appeals against the decision made by the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors (the respondent) on 04 September 2024 to refuse his application for a second trainee licence.
- Section 123(1) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 ('the Act') prohibits the giving of instruction paid for by or in respect of a pupil in the driving of a motor car unless the instructor's name is on the Register of Approved Driving Instructors or he is the holder of a current licence issued under Section 129(1) of the Act.
- The Appellant is not now and has never been on the said Register.
- A licence under Section 129 of the Act was granted to the Appellant for the purpose of enabling him to gain practical experience to undergo the examination of his ability to give instruction in the driving of motor cars and was valid from 26 February 2024 to 25 August 2024 (D1).
- On 14 August 2024 the Appellant applied for a second licence (D2). By way of an email dated 14 August 2024 (D3) the Appellant was notified the Respondent was considering the refusal of his application for a second licence. By way of an email received on 23 August 2024 (D4) the Appellant made representations. He stated that he has missed training time due to family caring responsibilities.He also stated that he would be negatively impacted financially without the additional trainee licence and would lose the experienced gained by having a trainee licence.
- After considering these representations the Respondent decided to refuse the Appellant's application. It has also to be Noted that the Appellant has failed to comply with the conditions of his first licence as the training objectives on his ADI 21AT training record form (D5) were not completed within the first three months of the licence period. Furthermore, he appears to be using his trainee licence as a source of income.
- The Respondent gave the Appellant notice of their decision in accordance with Section 129(4) of the Act by an email dated 05 September 2024 (D6).
- The Respondents reasons for refusing the application for a second licence were:
(i) The purpose of the provisions governing the issue of licences is to afford applicants the opportunity of giving instruction to members of the public whilst endeavouring to achieve registration. The system of issuing licences is not and must not be allowed to become an alternative to the system of registration.
(ii) The licence granted to applicants is not to enable the instructor to teach for however long it takes to pass the examinations, but to allow up to six months experience of instruction. This provides a very reasonable period in which to reach the qualifying standard in the examination and in particular, to obtain any necessary practical experience in tuition. Moreover, by virtue of the Appellant having applied for a second licence before the expiry date of the first, that licence has remained in force to the present time and will allow him to continue to give paid instruction until determination of the appeal;
(iii) Since passing his driving ability test the Appellant has failed the instructional ability test once. (Annex A). Despite ample time and opportunity the Appellant has not been able to reach the required standard for qualification as an Approved Driving Instructor; and,
(iv) the refusal of a second licence does not bar the Appellant from attempting the instructional ability test of the Register examinations. He does not need to hold a licence for that purpose, nor is it essential for him to give professional tuition under licence in order to obtain further training. The Appellant could attend a training course, or study and practice with an Approved Driving Instructor or give tuition on his own (provided that he does not receive payment of any kind for this). These alternatives are used by some trainees who acquire registration without obtaining any licences at all.
- It should also be noted that the Appellant had his second attempt at the instructional ability test booked for 22 January 2025 and at the hearing of this appeal the Appellant indicated he had booked another test for 20 February 2025.
- The Appellant lodged a Notice of Appeal dated 17 September 2024. In his grounds of appeal, the Appellant stated that his area is difficult to succeed in, the protracted delay in securing a test date is also causing him and his family financial hardship. He explained to the Tribunal that caring for his wife and newborn are demanding of his time and caused him delays. He seeks more time for additional training and a badge extension to allow him additional time to prepare himself for his final part 3 examination.
- In determining the appeal, I have considered the all of the documents provided in the Hearing Bundle and the representations made by the Appelant at this appeal.
- The Appellant relates to the refusal of a trainee licence which may be issued to a candidate who is preparing to sit the qualifying examination to become an ADI. The circumstances in which a person may be granted a trainee licence are set out in section 129 of the Act, and the Motor Cars (Driving Instruction) Regulations 2005 (the Regulations).
- The purpose of the trainee licence is to enable a person to acquire practical experience in giving instruction in driving motor cars with a view to undergoing such part of the examination referred to in section 125(3)(a) of the Act as consists of a practical test of ability and fitness to instruct, which is part of the qualifying examination to become an ADI.
- The Appellant has a right of appeal against the Respondent's decision pursuant to
section 131 of the Act.
- On appeal the tribunal may make such order as it thinks fit. It is for the Appellant to show on the balance of probabilities that the Respondent's
decision was wrong.
- The Respondent has set out their reasons set out above and has provided a formal statement as follows:
Section 123(1) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 ('the Act') prohibits the giving of instruction paid for by or in respect of a pupil in the driving of a motor car unless the instructor's name is on the Register of Approved Driving Instructors, or he is the holder of a current licence issued under Section 129(1) of the Act.
- After considering the Appellants representations the Respondent decided to refuse the Appellant's application and has provided above its reasons for doing so.
- Holding a trainee licence is not a prerequisite to qualifying as an ADI and nor is it a prerequisite to sitting part 3 of the examination. Aside from giving professional instruction under a trainee licence, there are other ways in which the Appellant could gain the skills needed to pass part 3. These are alternatives which mean that some trainees obtain pass the qualifying examination and obtain registration without ever having held a trainee licence.
- The Tribunal find that the Appellant has failed to show that the time he has had has been inadequate to acquire sufficient experience to pass the test. It is not necessary for the Appellant to have a trainee licence in order to sit part 3 and he has not shown that he is unable to obtain the necessary skills and experience by alternative means.
- On consideration of the papers in the Hearing Bundle provided and all the available evidence the Tribunal find on balance that the Respondent was justified in refusing the Appellant's application and it was not unreasonable for them to do so. I therefore must dismiss this appeal.
Judge Brian Kennedy KC
10 February 2025.