Saif Ullah v Registrar for Approved Driving Instructors

This is an appeal against a decision of the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors (‘the Registrar’) made on 13 January 2026 to refuse to grant the Appellant a second trainee licence.

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: ‘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. 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 29 August 2024. He passed Part 2 on 28 January 2025. He has failed two attempts at the Part 3 test on 16 April 2025 and 3 February 2026. The Appellant has cancelled 2 more such tests.

The Appellant applied for a trainee licence which was granted and was valid from 10 March 2025 to 9 September 2025.

The Appellant, applied for a second trainee licence on 3 December 2025 which was refused by the Registrar.

The reasons for the Registrar’s decision, in summary, were that although the Appellant had provided medical evidence, this did not explain the impact on the Appellant’s training or why he was unable to comply with the additional training requirements during the first licence (which, the Respondents notes was completed after the expiry of the first licence) and that it was not the intention of Parliament that candidates should be issued with trainee licences for as long as it takes them to pass the examination, and that the trainee licence system must not be used as an alternative to registration as a fully qualified Approved Driving Instructor.

The original grounds of appeal were that the Registrar’s decision was wrong in that the Appellant had provided medical evidence which properly explained why his conditions and circumstances had had an impact upon his training.

The Registrar in his response states:

I read and took account of a bundle of documents which includes the medical evidence relied upon by the Appellant and heard submissions from the Appellant.

The Appellant has failed two Part 3 tests and cancelled 2 Part 3 tests. However, I heard from the Appellant regarding his medical conditions for which he was under the care of his GP and also his caring responsibilities for his mother and brother.

Whilst I accept that the trainee license is not a substitute for taking and passing the test, the unique circumstances of this case mean that I am satisfied that it is fair and in the interests of justice to grant the appeal and allow the Appellant a second trainee licence. I consider that the Registrar failed to properly consider the Appellant’s personal circumstances and did not attach appropriate weight to the medical evidence provided when making his decision.

The appellant has his third and final attempt at the Part 3 test booked for 12 August 2026.

The Parties are reminded that pursuant to Regulation 3(4)(c) of the Motor Cars (Driving Instruction) Regulations an application to take the instructional ability and fitness test must be made within 2 years of passing the written examination, failing which the whole examination has to be retaken.

Accordingly, I allow this appeal and direct that the Appellant is granted a second trainee licence with effect from the date of this Decision.