UK case law
Kashif Babar Iqbal Rvegistrar of Approved Driving Instructors
[2026] UKFTT GRC 491 · First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) – Transport · 2026
The verbatim text of this UK judgment. Sourced directly from The National Archives Find Case Law. Not an AI summary, not a paraphrase — every word below is the original ruling, under Crown copyright and the Open Government Licence v3.0.
Full judgment
1. The Appellant appealed, on 16 September 2025, a decision of the Respondent refusing their application for a second trainee driving licence.
2. This appeal was referred to me to consider striking it out as an incomplete appeal as no copy of the decision under appeal had ben submitted by the Appellant and his Form GRC1 did not have the Declaration of Truth signed and dated.
3. On 29 October, the GRC Registrar issued Case Management Directions requiring the incomplete appeal to be made complete by 21 November 2025, failing which the appeal may be struck out pursuant to Rule 8(3)(a) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009 (‘the Rules’) without further direction. The Appellant did not comply. (The Appellant had previously failed to comply in this regard to provide a complete appeal within 28 days of 22 September 2025).
4. Case Management Directions dated 8 February 2026 issued by a judge directed the Appellant to state by 23 February 2026 whether they wished to continue their appeal, failing which the appeal may be struck out.
5. On 4 November 2025, the Respondent invited the Tribunal to strike out the appeal, pursuant to Rule 8(3)(c) as having no reasonable prospect of success as the Appellant had passed his Part 1 test on 5 October 2023 and therefore, since two years had passed, he was no longer eligible to book any further Part 3 test, pursuant to Regulation 3(4)(c) of the Motor Cars (Driving Instructor) Regulations 2005and, therefore, another trainee licence was not required. The Appellant was advised in the said Case Management Directions dated 8 February 2026 that, in those circumstances, their appeal may be struck out even if they did not concede that the time limit for completing all Parts of their ADI test had expired, and that if they did concede, their appeal would be struck out. The Appellant did not reply.
6. Accordingly, this appeal is struck out as having no reasonable prospect of success, pursuant to Rule 8(3)(c) of the Rules.