Anthony Griffith v Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors

1. The appeal is dismissed and the respondent’s decision of 23 May 2025 is confirmed. REASONS Background

2. The Appellant appeals against the decision made by the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors (the Respondent) on 23 May 2025 to refuse his application for a second trainee licence.

3. The Appellant is a trainee driving instructor and on 10 April 2025 and had applied for a second licence. By way of an email dated 29 April 2025 the Appellant was notified that the Respondent was considering the refusal of his application for a second licence. By way of an email received on 30 April 2025 the Appellant made representations whereby he stated that he were unaware of the training to be completed in three months. Also that they had difficulty booking dates with their trainer.

4. After considering these representations the Respondent decided to refuse the Appellant's application gave him notice of their decision in accordance with Section 129(4) of the Act by an email dated 23 May 2025.

5. The Respondents reasons for refusing the application for a third licence were: i. the purpose of the provisions governing the issue of licences is to afford applicants the opportunity of giving instruction to members of the public whilst endeavouring to achieve registration. The system of issuing licences is not and must not be allowed to become an alternative to the system of registration; ii. 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 in particular, to obtain any necessary practical experience in tuition. Moreover, by virtue of the Appellant having applied for a second licence before the expiry date of the first, that licence has remained in force to the present time and will allow him to continue to give paid instruction until determination of the appeal; iii. since passing his driving ability test the Appellant has failed the instructional ability test despite ample time and opportunity the Appellant has not been able to reach the required standard for qualification as an Approved Driving Instructor; and iv. the refusal of a second licence does not bar the Appellant from attempting the instructional ability test of the Register examinations. He does not need to hold a licence for that purpose, nor is it essential for him to give professional tuition under licence in order to obtain further training. The Appellant could attend a training course, or study and practice with an Approved Driving Instructor or give tuition on his own (provided that he does not receive payment of any kind for this). These alternatives are used by some trainees who acquire registration without obtaining any licences at all.

6. The Respondent also noted that the Appellant has his final attempt at the instructional ability test booked but awaiting an available date. Should the test go ahead, then the regulations determine that any appeal is bound to fail as a trainee licence can only be issued in order that an individual can gain the practical experience required to take the test.

7. The Appellant lodged a Notice of Appeal dated 27 May 2025.

8. In determining the appeal, I have considered the entirety of the documents and information in the hearing Bundle. The law

9. The Appeal relates to the refusal of a trainee licence which may be issued to a candidate who is preparing to sit the qualifying examination to become an ADI. The circumstances in which a person may be granted a trainee licence are set out in section 129 of the Act, and the Motor Cars (Driving Instruction) Regulations 2005 (the Regulations).

10. The purpose of the trainee licence is to enable a person to acquire practical experience in giving instruction in driving motor cars with a view to undergoing such part of the examination referred to in section 125(3)(a) of the Act as consists of a practical test of ability and fitness to instruct, which is part of the qualifying examination to become an ADI.

11. The Appellant has a right of appeal against the Respondent’s decision pursuant to section 131 of the Act. On appeal the tribunal may make such order as it thinks fit.

12. It is for the Appellant to show on the balance of probabilities that the Respondent’s decision was wrong. Findings and reasons:

13. The Respondent has set out their reasons (see paragraph 5 above). The form submitted indicates that the necessary training was not completed, and Mr. Griffith has failed the instructional ability test.

14. The Tribunal acknowledges the Appellant's difficulties in booking training and test appointments; however, these do not override the statutory purpose of the trainee licence scheme, which is to provide limited experience before qualifying as a registered instructor.

15. The Registrar has reasonably concluded that a second licence is not necessary for Mr. Griffith to continue preparing for the test, as unpaid training remains an option. The Tribunal also notes that Mr. Griffith has a final test attempt pending, which may render the appeal moot if successful.

16. On consideration of the papers in the bundle and the available evidence the Tribunal find on balance that the Respondent was justified in refusing the Appellant’s application and accordingly, the appeal is dismissed, and the decision of the Registrar upheld. Judge Brian Kennedy KC 10 November 2025.