Ian Carrie v The Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors

1. The appellant appeals against the decision made by the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors (the Registrar) on 4 September 2025 to refuse his application for a third trainee licence.

2. The appellant had been granted two trainee licences. They were valid from 29 July 2024 to 28 July 2025. On 1 July 2025 the appellant applied for a third trainee licence.

3. On 22 July 2025 the Registrar 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 23 July 2025. He stated that that he had experienced difficulties in obtaining a Part 3 test date and had a test cancelled.

5. The Registrar gave the following reasons for the decision made on 4 September 2025: 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 test. 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 Approved Driving Instructor (ADI) e. It is not necessary to hold a trainee licence in order to sit the part 3 test.

6. The appellant lodged a notice of appeal dated 11 September 2025. In his notice of appeal, the appellant stated that he had cancelled his part 3 test booked for 26 June 2025 because his car developed a very serious fault with its gearbox on a lesson on the day before the test and had to be recovered to a garage. The appellant said that he had looked at the possibility of hiring a car on which to take the test, but the pupil for the test was not comfortable with this so he did not proceed and cancelled the test because he had no other student who was suitable. He also stated that another test was not available before his licence was due to expire.

7. The Registrar in its response dated 8 December 2025 reiterated the above reasons for refusal. In addition, it noted that the appellant failed the part 3 test once and cancelled another test booked for 26 June 2025. The DVSA cancelled a test booked for 8 April 2025. The hearing

8. Neither the Appellant nor the Respondent attended the hearing on 20 March 2026 at 10am and no notification of absence or reason for not attending appeared to the judge to have been provided by either party. The Tribunal clerk attempted to contact the Appellant by telephone twice, leaving messages, but there was no answer or response to messages. I considered it was in the interests of justice to proceed without the parties being present because a full bundle had been provided including evidence from both parties, so determined the appeal without hearing from the parties.

9. The Tribunal subsequently became aware of an email from the Appellant which had been sent to the Tribunal at 7pm on the day before the hearing. This informed the Tribunal that he wished to cancel the hearing because he had decided not to pursue a further trainee licence at this time as he wishes to restart the qualification process. Due to the late notification, this was not placed before the judge before the hearing, so was not taken into account. I consider that it would not have made any material difference to the outcome of the appeal had it been before me, so it is not in the interests of justice to set aside the decision already made. The legal framework

10. 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).

11. 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.

12. It is for the appellant to show on balance of probabilities that the Registrar’s decision was wrong. Discussion and conclusion

13. The essence of the Registrar’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 19 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 current trainee licence.

14. In reaching its decision, the Tribunal has taken into account all the evidence submitted to it and considered all the circumstances relevant to this appeal.

15. 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: 20 March 2026