Murshid Musa Abed v Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors

Introduction

1. The Appellant is a trainee driving instructor who was granted two trainee licences under section 129 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 (the “Act”), for a combination of two six-month periods running from 3 June 2024 to 2 June 2025. The Appellant was refused a third trainee licence by a decision of the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors (‘the Registrar’) made on 10 June 2025. The Appellant now appeals that decision.

2. The Appellant attended the hearing via CVP but the Respondent, in line with its usual practice, did not attend and instead sought to rely on the written submissions alone. The Tribunal was satisfied that it was fair and just to conduct the hearing in this way.

3. What follows is a summary of the submissions, evidence and our view of the law. It does not seek to provide every step of our reasoning. The absence of a reference by us to any specific submission or evidence does not mean it has not been considered. Legal Framework

4. The Appellant's name is not on the Register of Approved Driving Instructors ("the Register") and the Appellant is therefore prohibited from giving paid driving instructions by section 123 (1) of the Act unless they hold a trainee licence issued by the Registrar pursuant to section 129(1) of the Act .

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

6. In order to qualify as an Approved Driving Instructor, applicants must pass the ‘Qualifying Examination’ comprised of three parts: the written examination (‘Part 1’); the driving ability and fitness test (‘Part 2’); and the instructional ability and fitness test (‘Part 3’).

7. The whole qualifying examination must be completed within two years of passing Part 1, and only three attempts are allowed for each Part, failure to comply with either of these requirements results in the whole examination needing to be retaken.

8. 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.

9. 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."

10. By section 129(8) (c) of the Act "before deciding whether or not to refuse the application, the Registrar must take into consideration any such representations made within that period."

11. By section 129(6) of the Act :- "Notwithstanding any provision of regulations made by virtue of subsection (5) above prescribing the period for which a licence is to be in force, where a person applies for a new licence in substitution for a licence held by him and current at the date of the application, the previous licence shall not expire— (a)until the commencement of the new licence, or (b) if the Registrar decides to refuse the application, until the time limited for an appeal under the following provisions of this Part of this Act against the decision has expired and, if such an appeal is duly brought, it is finally disposed of."

12. 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.

13. 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 Appeal

14. The Appellant’s notice of appeal dated 23 June 2025 relies on the following grounds as reasons for the appeal: a. The DVSA expects the Trainees to take up to three part 3 tests within the first 6 month licence but they have no available dates for the tests. b. The trainee licences the Appellant has benefited from have now run out and he has only been able to take the part 3 test once, another test is currently being placed on hold by the DVSA. c. If the Appellant stops training he believes he will have no chance at passing the test. d. The Appellant states that he is not using the trainee licence as an alternative to qualifying, he would like to be fully qualified but the lack of tests means he has to keep practicing. e. As no new test date has been provided the Appellant believes the refusal to grant another licence is wrong.

15. The Appellant’s notice of appeal also stated that the desired outcome of the appeal is “ to be granted an extension on another trainee licence and a test date ...”.

16. Additionally in the Appellant’s representations to the Registrar by email of the 28 May 2025 it is set out that: a. There are exceptional circumstances in the Appellants case , namely that because of the current unavailability of test dates it has been outside of the Appellants control to book and pass the test in the period of the licence . b. The Appellants failed part 3 test result was given a score that was on the cusp of passing. c. The Appellant is 100% confident that they will pass the next part 3 test attempt and they just need the opportunity to continue preparing.

17. The Registrar’s notice of refusal dated 3 June 2025, considered the representations of the Appellant and states the reasons for the refusal as: a. The Appellant failed to provide any evidence of lost training time. b. The Appellant had already been granted two trainee licence each of six months duration which is considered to be a more than adequate period of time. c. It was not Parliament’s intention that the candidates should be issued licences for as long as it takes them to pass the examination and the trainee licence system must not be allowed to become an alternative to registration as a fully qualified Approved Driving Instructor.

18. The Registrar’s statement of case dated 7 November 2025 resists the appeal on essentially the same grounds as set out above previously. The Registrar further states that: a. 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 (para 6(i)). b. 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 per trainee licence granted. 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 third licence before the expiry date of the second, that licence has remained in force to the present time and will allow the Appellant to continue to give paid instruction until determination of the appeal; (para 6(ii)). c. Since passing the driving ability test the Appellant has failed the instructional ability test once and non-completed another such test (due to the vehicle being mechanically unsuitable or no tax). Despite ample time and opportunity the Appellant has not been able to reach the required standard for qualification as an Approved Driving Instructor. (para 6(iii)). d. The refusal of a third licence does not bar the Appellant from attempting the instructional ability test of the Register examinations. They do not need to hold a licence for that purpose. The Appellant could attend a training course, or study and practice with an Approved Driving Instructor or give tuition on their own (provided that they do not receive payment of any kind for this). These alternatives are used by some trainees who acquire registration without obtaining any licences at all (para 6(iv)). The evidence

19. We considered a bundle of evidence containing 22 numbered pages and heard from the Appellant. In summary the Appellant set out: a. That the Appellant agreed the summary of their case and that of the Respondent was accurate and there was nothing extra they wished to add to that. b. That there have been no further Part 3 tests other than those listed as their booking remains on hold. c. That their entire focus is on training to become a fully qualified ADI, but it requires a lot of time and expense. If they stopped and just sat down awaiting the test they would become de-skilled and could not afford to do nothing and not be receiving an income. However primarily the point is to receive further training. d. Accepts that in the 17 months of Trainee licences they suffered from no lack of training time nor lack of students. Sole concern is that with an extended gap between the last trainee licence and the Part 3 test that is still on hold they fear becoming deskilled. e. In response to the Respondent’s challenge that the skills can be maintained through ways other than receiving payment for training, the Appellants only response was that they had been told it is hard to prove on the day of the test that they are not giving instruction for payment and others have been challenged on this. Conclusions

20. We have considered the Appellant’s points of appeal.

21. The Tribunal is aware that it can be difficult to book a Part 3 test, and that both long waits as well as DVSA cancellations are more common than they should be. However, it is noted that the Appellant failed part 3 on the 18 March 2025, had a non-complete on the 28 April 2025 because the vehicle was not mechanically suitable.

22. Despite it being a common misunderstanding, it is not the case that individuals are entitled to continual renewal of trainee licences until they pass their Part 3 test. The six month period of such licences is set on the basis this is an adequate period to prepare for the Part 3 Test, and it is not necessary to hold a Trainee Licence in order to either prepare for or to take the Part 3 test.

23. We note that the Appellant has already had the benefit of two trainee licences . Additionally, by applying for a third trainee licence the Appellant has had the benefit of s.129(6) (b) of the Act extending the last trainee licence until this appeal is disposed of. In this case the Appellant has benefitted from over 17 months of opportunity to train others for payment and they admitted themselves that at no point in that period did they suffer from lost training time or a lack of students.

24. We further note that had the third trainee licence been granted this would have expired on the day of this Appeal and so the Appellant has effectively already benefitted from the equivalent of a third trainee licence. The Appellant however seeks to further extend the trainee licence until such time as they can take the Part 3 test 25.It is not necessary for an individual to have a trainee licence in order to take the Part 3 test and some candidates take and pass part 3 without providing training for payment at all. However, that is not the case here where the Appellant has had 17 months within which to conduct training for payment. The Appellant has had nearly triple the period within which to fit the same experience in that many do in just 6 months and some do without ever having a Trainee licence. 26 The Appellant has not persuaded us that the Registrar’s decision was wrong in any way. In all the circumstances, we agree with the Registrar’s decision and dismiss this appeal. Signed Tribunal Judge T Barrett Date: 2/12/2025