Case Reference: D/2024/0409
Transport
Determined on paper
on 18th December 2024
Before
HHJ DAVID DIXON
Between
DENNIS JOHN FREDERICK HILL
Appellant
and
THE REGISTRAR OF APPROVED
DRIVING INSTRUCTORS
Respondent
Decision: The appeal is dismissed with immediate effect.
REASONS
Background to Appeal
This appeal concerns a decision of the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors (“the Registrar”) made 17th April 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 (Footnote: 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, dated 30th April 2024, indicates he needed extra time as the DVSA cancelled a test that he had booked and if not granted a third licence a number of his current pupils would be disadvantaged having to find a new instructor.
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 failed his Part 3 twice.
The Registrar indicates the Appellant has been licensed from 27th March 2023 to date, a period so far of almost 21 months.
Mode of Determination
The Tribunal considered the appeal on the papers, the Appellant and Respondent agreeing to such a determination. In accordance with the Tribunal Rules the Tribunal assessed whether it was right and proper to continue on the papers and came to the clear view to do so would be fair to all.
The Tribunal considered a bundle of evidence containing 23 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 (Footnote: 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.
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 (Footnote: 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.
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 suggests a test date being moved in effect allows for a third licence. I do not agree.
The purpose of the licence is to allow a trainee the opportunity to get instructional experience and training. There is no suggestion that that was not provided. The Appellant has had the benefit of far longer than the norm and as a result the Appeal must fail, as there is no basis for a further licence.
The Appeal is dismissed with immediate effect.
The Appellant still has a little time left from the time he passed his Part 2 until the end date, and is still therefore able to take his Part 3 if he so chooses. If the Appellant takes that option the Tribunal wishes him well.
(Signed)
HHJ David Dixon
DATE: 18th December 2024