Philip Jonathan Hobbs v Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors

The Appellant is a trainee driving instructor. This is an appeal against a decision of the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors (‘the Registrar’) made on 13 January 2025 to refuse to grant the Appellant a second trainee licence.

The parties consented to the appeal being determined on the papers and I am satisfied that the issues can properly be determined without a hearing. The requirements of Rule 32(1) (a) and (b) of The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009 are met.

I have considered a bundle of evidence containing 19 numbered pages, plus index.

The Appellant’s Notice of Appeal dated 19 January 2025 relies upon difficulties completing the necessary training due to his car being damaged in an accident, a student refusing to accompany him in a training session because of his trainer, and other personal family circumstances.

The Registrar’s Statement of Case dated 2 June 2025 resists the appeal. The Registrar says that the Appellant failed to comply with the conditions of his first trainee licence and has provided no evidence of lost training time or a lack of pupils. Despite ample time and opportunity, the Appellant has not reached the standard required for qualification as an Approved Driving Instructor (‘ADI’).

The Appellant did not provide a reply to the Respondent’s Statement of Case.

The grant of a trainee licence enables applicants to provide instruction for payment before they are qualified as an ADI. A trainee licence may be granted in the circumstances set out in section 129 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 (‘the Act’) and the Motor Cars (Driving Instruction) Regulations 2005.

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.’

To qualify as an ADI, 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. If a candidate has passed Part 2, they may be granted 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 Appellant passed Part 1 of the Qualifying Examination on 15 February 2024 and passed Part 2 on 25 March 2024. As of 2 June 2025 (the date of the Registrar’s statement of case), the Appellant had not yet taken the Part 3 test.

The Appellant is not now and never has been on the Register of Approved Driving Instructors.

A licence was granted to the Appellant under section 129 of the Act to gain practical experience to assist in passing Part 3 of the Qualifying Examination. The licence was valid from 8 July 2024 to 7 January 2025.

It was a condition of that licence that the Appellant completes a minimum of 20 hours additional training delivered by an ADI. The Appellant failed to comply with that condition of his first trainee licence.

On 11 December 2024 the Appellant applied for a second trainee licence. As the Appellant applied before the first licence expired, the trainee licence has continued in force pending the outcome of this appeal (section 129(6)). Therefore, the Appellant has had the benefit of a trainee licence for 13 months by the time of this determination of the appeal.

By email sent on 17 December 2024 the Registrar notified the Appellant that consideration was being given to refusing the application for a second licence for failure to complete the mandatory training required under his previous licence.

The Appellant made representations in response on 26 December 2024. He acknowledged that his 20 hours of additional training remained incomplete. The Appellant referred to a change in personal circumstances during the first 3 months of his trainee licence involving the care of his wife. This had led to great difficulty in completing his planned training. Arrangements have now been put in place to address his wife’s needs. The Appellant stated that further difficulty had arisen due to his franchise car being damaged during a lesson in a non-fault accident resulting in training sessions being cancelled.

Having considered those representations, the Registrar gave notice to refuse the licence application on 13 January 2025.

In summary, the reasons for the Registrar’s decision were:

The Appellant’s grounds of appeal may be summarised as follows:

The outcome sought in the Notice of Appeal is a second trainee licence. Holding a trainee licence is not necessary to qualify as an ADI. Indeed, many people qualify without having held a trainee licence.

There was a breach of condition of the first licence. In this regard, I am sympathetic to the Appellant’s personal circumstances. I accept there would have been resultant impact upon his training although I cannot gauge the full extent without approximate dates of how long his training was affected. The other reasons given for missed training are lacking in detail. For instance, no details are provided of the amount of training cancelled due to the Appellant’s car being damaged. Nor is it explained how the refusal of one student to continue in-car training sessions impacted upon training. Despite the challenges, I note that the Appellant was able to achieve around 50% of the requisite training during his first licence period.

Ultimately, the overall period in which the Appellant has now been able to give driving instruction should have provided a reasonable opportunity to obtain the practical experience envisaged by the Act. The trainee license is not a substitute for taking and passing the test. It is not the purpose of trainee licences to keep renewing them until all attempts at passing the Qualifying Examination have been taken.

In all the circumstances there is not sufficient evidence of significant gravity presented to upset the Respondent’s decision and accordingly the appeal is dismissed.