Ibrahim Khaled Almarei v Registrar for Approved Driving Instructors

This appeal concerns a decision of the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors ("the Registrar") made on 26/11/2024 to refuse to grant the Appellant a second trainee licence.

The Appellant is a trainee driving instructor who has previously been granted one trainee licence under section 129 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 (the "Act"). This licence ran between 27/05/2024 and 26/11/2024. The Appellant applied for a second trainee licence on 28/10/2024. This application was refused by the Registrar on 26/11/2024. The Appellant now appeals the Registrar's decision.

The Appellant requested that the appeal be decided without a hearing. The Respondent did not request an oral hearing. The Tribunal had the benefit of the Respondent’s response, and the reasons for the Appeal from the Appellant. I did not consider that further information was required from either party in order to make an informed decision. I was therefore satisfied that I could properly determine the issues without a hearing in accordance with Rule 32(1)(b) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009.

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 section 129 of the Act and the Motor Cars (Driving Instruction) Regulations 2005.

In order to qualify as an Approved Driving Instructor, applicants must pass the Qualifying Examination. This is made up of: 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 Part 3 test must be booked within two years of passing Part 1, otherwise the whole examination has to be retaken.

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". The purpose of the provisions governing the issue of licences is to afford applicants the opportunity of giving instruction to members of the public in order to achieve registration. The system of issuing licences is not and must not be allowed to become an alternative to the system of registration.

A candidate may be granted a trainee licence if they have passed Part 2. However, holding a trainee licence is not necessary in order to take the Part 3 test or qualify as an Approved Driving Instructor, and many people qualify without having held a trainee licence.

The powers of the Tribunal in determining this appeal are set out in section 131 of the Act. The Tribunal may make such order as it thinks fit (section 131(3)). The Tribunal stands in the shoes of the Registrar and takes a fresh decision on the evidence available to it, giving appropriate weight to the Registrar's decision 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.

I have considered a bundle of evidence containing 28 pages. Whilst reference is not made to each individual piece of evidence considered in this decision notice, I have carefully considered all of the evidence in the hearing bundle.

That respondent submits that the reasons for refusal are that 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 to obtain any necessary practical experience in tuition. The Appellant has already had one trainee licence which cover a period of 6 months. Since passing their driving ability test, the Appellant has failed the instructional ability test once. A second Part 3 test was at the time of the appeal booked awaiting an available date.

Despite ample time and opportunity, the Appellant has not been able to reach the required standard for qualification as an Approved Driving Instructor. The refusal of a second licence does not bar the Appellant from attempting the instructional ability test of the Register examinations. The Appellant could attend a training course, or study and practice with an Approved Driving Instructor or give tuition on their own (provided that he does not receive payment of any kind for this).

The appellant submits that despite booking their part 3 test in September 2024, they could not take the test until 9^th December 2024, after the expiry of the first trainee licence in November 2024, which should mean that a second trainee licence is reasonable. The Appellant states that they are fully committed to becoming a qualified driving instructor and have taken significant steps to ensure readiness for the test in December. Receiving a second trainee licence would allow them to continue to teach for a reward.

The respondent has notified the Tribunal that the Appellant failed the part 3 test in December 2024 and as of January 2025 was awaiting a date for a second part 3 test.

I do not know at the date of this decision, whether a second Part 3 test date has now been provided to the Appellant, or whether this has now been taken. However, whilst I accept that the matters are finely balanced and there have been nationwide problems with booking tests, I have concluded that the specific circumstances raised by the Appellant do not demonstrate evidence of exceptional personal circumstances, lost training time or a lack of pupils and they have had the benefit of a trainee licence for 6 months. Trainee licences are not designed to be a source of income in the absence of full registration but are to provide an opportunity to receive experience in order to pass the Part 3 test. Therefore, the Registrar’s decision to refuse to grant a second trainee licence in 26/11/2024 was correct.

I note that the Appellant has had the benefit of a continuing licence running from the refusal in November 2024, to the date of this hearing of the appeal. This should have provided ample additional time to book a second Part 3 test and continue to receive practical experience, in order to pass the required Part 3 test.

The appeal is therefore dismissed and the Respondent’s decision of 26/11/2024 is upheld.