General Regulatory Chamber
Transport
B e f o r e :
TRIBUNAL JUDGE HEALD
____________________
SAWPANA AKTHER |
Appellant |
|
- and - |
||
REGISTRAR OF APPROVED DRIVING INSTRUCTORS |
Respondent |
____________________
____________________
Crown Copyright ©
Decision: The appeal is Dismissed. The Registrar's decision of 14 June 2024 is upheld.
Introduction
Legal Framework
'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.'
"The Registrar may refuse to grant a licence under this section to an applicant to whom such a licence has previously been issued."
"before deciding whether or not to refuse the application, the Registrar must take into consideration any such representations made within that period."
"Notwithstanding any provision of regulations made by virtue of subsection (5) above prescribing the period for which a licence is to be in force, where a person applies for a new licence in substitution for a licence held by him and current at the date of the application, the previous licence shall not expire—
(a)until the commencement of the new licence, or
(b) if the Registrar decides to refuse the application, until the time limited for an appeal under the following provisions of this Part of this Act against the decision has expired and, if such an appeal is duly brought, it is finally disposed of."
The Appeal
a. She had less training during her first trainee licence due to the significant caring responsibilities she has for others.
b. She has a second Part 3 test scheduled for the 14 August 2024.
c. She needs to be able to show a valid trainee licence to her insurer otherwise her driving instructor insurance will be cancelled and she will not be able to further train or attend the test.
a. She was unable to pass the Part 3 test on the first attempt due to several personal challenges.
b. Her caring responsibilities "significantly limited [her] ability to focus on [her] training."
c. She had attempted to book a second Part 3 Test but it was put on hold by the system.
a. The Appellant failed to comply with the conditions of the first licence.
b. The Appellant had already been granted one trainee licence of six months duration which is considered to be a more than adequate period of time.
c. It was not Parliament's intention that the candidates should be issued licences for as long as it takes them to pass the examination and the trainee licence system must not be allowed to become an alternative to registration as a fully qualified Approved Driving Instructor.
a. The Appellant failed to comply with the conditions of her first licence as the training objectives on her ADI 21 AT training record form were not all completed within the first three months of the licence period (para 5).
b. 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 (para 6(i)).
c. 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 her to continue to give paid instruction until determination of the appeal (para 6(ii)).
d. Since passing her 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. (para 6(iii)).
e. The refusal of a second licence does not bar the Appellant from attempting the instructional ability test of the Register examinations. She does not need to hold a licence for that purpose, nor is it essential for her 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 her own (provided that she 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 (para 6(iv)).
The evidence
Conclusions
a. We accept that the Appellant's personal circumstances and significant caring responsibilities will likely have impacted her ability and availability to train during the period of her first trainee licence and prior to her unsuccessful attempt of the Part 3 test on 23 May 2024.
b. We are aware that it can be difficult to book a Part 3 test and it is common for the system to take a booking but immediately place it 'on hold' without a date being set for the Part 3 Test. However, we also note that the Appellant had a second attempt at the Part 3 Test scheduled for the 14 August 2024 (it is unknown to us whether that Test took place and if it did, what the outcome was).
c. We also accept that the holding of a Trainee licence is necessary in order to maintain the necessary insurance needed when training by giving instruction for payment.
a. her stated desired appeal outcome of an extension so as to allow her to continue training up to her booked Part 3 Test on the 14 August 2024, as well as
b. the fixed statutory maximum period within which she must pass the Part 3 test.
Signed Tribunal Judge Thomas Barrett
Date: 19/1/2025