Yousaf Muhammad v Registrar for Approved Driving Instructors

This is an appeal against a decision of the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors (‘the Registrar’) made on 20 January 2026 to refuse to grant the Appellant a third trainee licence.

Neither party attended the hearing. The appellant had applied to postpone the hearing by email sent the night before, on the grounds that he was unable to attend because he was working. I refused that application for the reasons given in the order. I decided that it was in the interests of justice to determine the appeal in the absence of the parties. The parties had had the opportunity to attend the hearing and there was no good reason for their absence. I was satisfied that it was in the interests of justice and in accordance with the overriding objective to proceed in the absence of the parties and to determine the appeal on the basis of the material before me in the bundle.

The grant of a trainee licence enables applicants to provide instruction for payment before they are qualified.

A trainee licence may be granted in the circumstances set out in s. 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:

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. The grant of a trainee licence enables applicants to provide instruction for payment before they are qualified. It is possible to qualify as an Approved Driving Instructor without having held a trainee licence.

The powers of the Tribunal in determining this appeal are set out in s.131 of the Act. The Tribunal may make such order as it thinks fit.

When making its Decision, 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.

The Appellant passed Part 1 of the Qualifying Examination on 12 March 2024. He failed his first attempt at Part 2 on 3 July 2024 and passed Part 2 on 24 July 2024. He failed his first attempt at Part 3. The Appellant had his first attempt at the Part 3 booked for 4 June 2026.

The Appellant has had two trainee licences valid from 30 October 2024 to 29 October 2025. The Appellant applied for a third trainee licence on 26 October 2025. As the Appellant applied before the licence expired, this means that, at the date of the hearing, the Appellant has been the beneficiary of a trainee licence for 1 year and 8 months.

The Appellant’s grounds of appeal are that he could not get enough training because he had neck pain which meant he could not sit for driving properly.

The Registrar, in his response to the appeal, states that although the Appellant provided medical evidence, it did not substantiate actual practice time lost:

I read and took account of a bundle of documents. The claimant produced evidence from his GP. That evidence records a consultation on 1 October 2025 which states as follows:

Neither the Appellant nor his GP have provided any indication of how much training time the Appellant has lost as a result of his neck pain, or for what period of time he suffered from neck pain. I accept that the Appellant may well have missed some training time as a result of the fact that he could not sit for driving properly as a result of neck pain. However, in the absence any specific details of lost training time, I am not persuaded that this prevented him from having a reasonable opportunity to obtain the practical experience envisaged by the Act. When the Registrar made his decision, the Appellant had already had a trainee licence for 12 months, which provided him with ample opportunity to gain practical experience, even if he had to take some time off or was unable to teach as many lessons as a result of neck pain.

I note that the Appellant had his first attempt at the instructional ability test booked for 2 June 2026. I do not know the outcome of that test. If the Appellant failed this attempt and wishes to maintain his practical experience until his next attempt, he is permitted to do this in other ways as outlined by the Registrar.

Having weighed all matters in the balance, the Appellant has not persuaded me that the Registrar’s decision was wrong in any way. In all the circumstances, I agree with the Registrar’s decision and the appeal is dismissed.