Yasim Haidari v The Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors

This appeal is brought pursuant to the Road Traffic Act 1988 ("the Act") and relates to a decision made by the Respondent ("the Registrar") dated 6 November 2025 April 2025 ("the Decision") to refuse the Appellant's request for a third trainee licence. The Registrar, as well as opposing the appeal, has applied for it to be struck out by rule 8(3)(c) The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009 ("2009 Rules").

A person may only provide paid driving instruction if their name is on the Register (section 123(1) of the Act) or if they hold a licence by section 129(1) of the Act and in accordance with The Motor Cars (Driving Instruction) Regulations 2005 ("the 2005 Regs").

To qualify as an Approved Driving Instructor ("ADI") an applicant is required to pass a Qualifying Examination. This is in 3 parts namely part 1 being a written examination, the driving ability and fitness test in part 2 and the instructional ability and fitness test in part 3. Three attempts only are allowed at each part.

By section 129(3) of the Act "The Registrar may refuse to grant a licence under this section to an applicant to whom such a licence has previously been issued."

Reg 14 of the 2005 Regs states:-

Having passed part 2 the Appellant was issued with two 6 month licences. The Appellant then requested a 3rd licence. On 8 October 2025 the Registrar told the Appellant that he was considering refusing this request about which on 11 October 2025 the Appellant made representations. On 6 November 2025 the Registrar notified the Appellant of the Decision. This appeal, dated 11 November 2025, is from that Decision and the Registrar provided a short response dated 13 November 2025.

In the Appellant's appeal form reference was made to a test date on 19 December 2025. The Registrar says that on 19 December 2025 the Appellant failed part 3 for a 3rd time. Therefore on 22 December 2025 an application was made (copied to the Appellant) seeking the striking out of the appeal by rule 8(3)(c) 2009 Rules on the basis of this 3rd failed attempt and reg 14(b) of the 2005 Regs.

Rule 8(3)(c) 2009 Rules provides that "The Tribunal may strike out the whole or a part of the proceedings if—(c) the Tribunal considers there is no reasonable prospect of the appellant's case, or part of it, succeeding." Rule 8(4) provides that:-

On 7 January 2026 Directions were given to afford the Appellant a further opportunity to make representation on the strike out request as required by rule 8(4) 2009 Rules or to ask for the withdrawal of the appeal. These CMD were sent to the parties on 7 January 2026 but it appears there has been no response from the Appellant. Rule 32(3) 2009 Rules permits the appeal to be disposed of without a hearing.

The Appellant has failed the 3rd attempt at the instructional ability test. Having considered the above (in particular reg 14(b) of the 2005 Regs) and rule 2 2009 Rules in my view there is no reasonable prospect of the Appellant's casesucceeding. The appeal is therefore struck out.