First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber)

Neutral citation number: [2025] UKFTT 437 (GRC)

Case Reference: FT/D/2024/0926

First-tier Tribunal

(General Regulatory Chamber)

Transport

Decided without a hearing

Decision given on:  22 April 2025

Before

 

JUDGE HARRIS

 

Between

 

Ruwan prasanna Maldeniya

Appellant

and

 

THE REGISTRAR OF APPROVED DRIVING INSTRUCTORS

Respondent

 

 

Decision: The appeal is Dismissed

The decision of the Respondent dated 16 October 2024 is confirmed.

 

REASONS

 

1.      The appellant appeals against the decision made by the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors (the respondent) on 16 October 2024 to refuse his application for a third trainee licence. The appeal was listed for determination without a hearing, with the agreement of the parties.

 

2.      The appellant had been granted two trainee licences. They were valid from 7 August 2023 to 6 August 2024. On 12 July 2024 the appellant applied for a third trainee licence.

 

3.      On 26 July 2024 the respondent notified the appellant that consideration was being given to refusing his application. He was invited to make representations.

 

4.      The appellant responded by email on 2 August 2024. He stated that the trainee licence is his only source of income, and that he has applied himself to training and been highly committed, but has experienced delays while obtaining a test date

 

5.      The respondent gave the following reasons for the decision made on 16 October 2024:

a.      The appellant provided no evidence to support lack of pupils or training time.

b.      The appellant had the benefit of two trainee licences for a period of 12 months, which is considered more than adequate time to gain sufficient experience to pass a Part 3.

c.       Parliament’s intention was not to licence candidates for as long as it takes them to pass the examination.

d.     The trainee licence must not become an alternative to registration as a fully qualified ADI.

e.      It is not necessary to hold a trainee licence in order to sit the part 3 examination.

 

6.      The appellant lodged a notice of appeal dated 29 October 2024. In his notice of appeal, the appellant does not explain why he considers that the respondent’s decision is wrong. He states that he needed more time to practice teaching techniques and noted that his not being granted a third trainee licence would have an impact on his learners.

 

7.      The respondent in its response dated 17 December 2024 reiterated the above reasons for refusal. In addition, it noted that the appellant appears to be using his trainee licence as a source of income. It also noted that the appellant had his final attempt at a part 3 test booked for 19 February 2025. The Tribunal has not been notified of the outcome of this test.

 

8.      The circumstances in which a person may be granted a trainee licence are set out in Section 129 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 (the Act) and the Motor Cars (Driving Instruction) Regulations 2005 (the Regulations).

 

9.      The appellant’s right of appeal and the powers of the Tribunal to determine this appeal are set out in s.131 of the Act. The Tribunal will make a fresh decision on the evidence before it and may make such order as it thinks fit.

 

10.  It is for the appellant to show on balance of probabilities that the respondent’s decision was wrong.

 

11.  The essence of the respondent’s decision is that the appellant has been provided, under his previous two licences, with more than adequate time to sit the required tests to become an ADI. The appellant has already had two trainee licences, and because the application for his third licence was made before the expiry of his second licence, he has had the benefit of a continuing licence while his appeal has been pending, which has been valid for 18 months to date. The appellant can continue to provide instruction, so long as it is without payment, if he considers that he needs further experience before sitting the test. He can also sit the part 3 test without a trainee licence.

 

12.  In reaching its decision, the Tribunal has taken into account all the evidence submitted to it in advance of the hearing and considered all the circumstances relevant to this appeal.

 

13.  In all the circumstances, the Tribunal finds that the appellant has not persuaded it that the Registrar’s decision was wrong in any way and accordingly dismisses the appeal.

 

 

Signed       Judge Harris                                                     Date: 22 April 2025