First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber)

Neutral citation number: [2025] UKFTT 517 (GRC)

 Case Reference: FT/D/2024/0742

First-tier Tribunal

(General Regulatory Chamber)

Transport

Heard by Cloud Video Platform

Heard on: 9 May 2025

Decision given on: 12 May 2025

Before

 

JUDGE TAFT

 

Between

 

CORNELIUS NGUATEM

Appellant

and

 

REGISTRAR OF APPROVED DRIVING INSTRUCTORS

Respondent

Representation:

For the Appellant: Did not appear

For the Respondent: Did not appear

 

Decision: The appeal is Dismissed

 

Mode of hearing:      The Tribunal was satisfied that it was fair and just to conduct the hearing using Cloud Video Platform (CVP). Neither party attended. The Tribunal considered Rule 36 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009 (as amended), noted that both parties had been given notice of the hearing and determined that it was in the interests of justice to proceed. The Appellant was contacted by telephone when he did not appear at the commencement of the hearing but did not answer. The Respondent has indicated that it does not intend to appear at hearings of this nature for the foreseeable future.

 

 

REASONS

Introduction

1.      The Appellant is a trainee driving instructor who was granted a trainee licence under section 129 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 (the "Act"), for a six-month period from 19 June 2023. He was given a second trainee licence, which expired on 18 June 2024. He was refused a third trainee licence by a decision of the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors ('the Registrar') made on 8 August 2024. The Appellant now appeals that decision.

Legal Framework

2.      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').  The whole qualifying examination must be completed within two years of passing Part 1. Only three attempts are allowed for each Part. The whole examination must be retaken if an applicant fails Part 2 or Part 3 three times or does not pass both within the two years. 

 

3.      If a candidate has passed Part 2, they may be granted a licence under section 129(1) of the Act:

'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.'

 

4.      This is commonly known as 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.

 

5.      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." 

 

6.      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."  

 

7.      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." 

 

8.      Section 131 of the Act gives a right of appeal to this Tribunal. The Tribunal may make such order as it thinks fit. In doing so, the Tribunal must consider whether the Registrar's decision was wrong. The Tribunal makes a fresh decision on the evidence available to it but must give 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 Decision

9.      On 15 July 2024, the Registrar informed the Appellant that he was considering refusing his application for a third trainee licence. The Appellant made representations on 23 July 2024 that:

a.      He was unable to devote himself to training due to family commitments.

b.      It was very difficult to find a date for his Part 3 test.

c.       Family issues affected his performance in his first two attempts at the Part 3 test.

d.     He was waiting for a date for the third attempt.

e.      He had given up other jobs, so this was his only source of income.

 

10.  On 8 August 2024, the Registrar notified the Appellant that it refused his application for a third trainee licence. The notice of refusal states the reasons for the refusal as:

a.      The Appellant did not provide evidence to support claims made in the representations or loss of practice time.

b.      The Appellant had already been granted two trainee licences 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.

The Appeal

11.   The Appellant's notice of appeal dated 23 August 2024 relies on the following grounds as reasons for the appeal:

a.      He was unable to devote himself to training due to family commitments.

b.      It was very difficult to find a date for his Part 3 test.

c.       Family issues, including bereavements, affected his performance in his first two attempts at the Part 3 test.

d.     He was waiting for a date for the third attempt.

e.      He had given up other jobs so this was his only source of income.

 

12.   The Registrar's statement of case dated 18 November 2024 resists the appeal. The Registrar states that:

a.      The Appellant had not provided any evidence of lost training time or lack of pupils.

b.      Whilst citing lack of test availability, he had cancelled three tests.

c.       He was using the trainee licence as a source of income.

d.     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)).

e.      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. The Appellant had already had two licences totalling twelve months. Moreover, by virtue of the Appellant having applied for a third 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 (para 6(ii)).

f.        Since passing his driving ability test the Appellant has failed the instructional ability test twice and cancelled three tests. 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)).

g.      The refusal of a third 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 (para 6(iv)).

The evidence

13.  The Tribunal considered a bundle of evidence containing 20 pages, including the Appellants full trainee licence history from the registrar.

Tribunal's Findings of Fact

14.  The Appellant passed his Part 1 Test on 15 May 2023 and Part 2 Test on 31 May 2023. The Appellant's first trainee licence was granted on 19 June 2023 for a period of six months. He was granted a second licence to expire on 18 June 2024. He failed his Part 3 Test on 20 November 2023 having cancelled two previous tests. He failed again on 9 April 2024 having cancelled two previous tests. He then cancelled a test scheduled for 16 April 2024. A test was scheduled for 10 January 2025 but there is no information before the Tribunal as to whether the Appellant took that test.

 

Conclusions

15.  The Tribunal considered the Appellant's points of appeal.

 

16.  The six-month period of trainee licences is set on the basis that this is considered to be an adequate period to prepare for the Part 3 Test. Trainee licence holders can apply for a suspension of their licence if circumstances prevent them using it to prepare for the Part 3 test. It is not necessary to hold a trainee licence in order to either prepare for or to take the Part 3 test - only to receive payment for providing lessons.

 

17.  The Appellant has already had the benefit of two trainee licence covering a period of twelve months from 19 June 2023 to 18 June 2024. Additionally, by applying for a third trainee licence the Appellant has had the benefit of s.129(6)(b) of the Act extending the second trainee licence until this appeal is disposed of (i.e. a period of almost eleven months). Had the second trainee licence been granted this would have expired long before the consideration of this appeal.

 

18.  The Appellant has not discharged his burden of satisfying the Tribunal that the Registrar's decision was wrong. He has provided no evidence to support his assertions that he has had difficulties with training, with booking tests or that his performance was affected and did not appear before the Tribunal to provide any further explanation. He has cancelled four tests himself. Again, the Tribunal has no explanation for that.

 

19.  The Tribunal therefore dismisses this appeal.

 

 

 

Signed                                                                                  Date: 9 May 2025

                                                                 

Judge Taft