Malik Muhammad Naeem 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”). The two six-month periods spanned 10 June 2024 to 9 June 2025. He was refused a third trainee licence by a decision of the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors (‘the Registrar’) made on 4 July 2025 . The Appellant now appeals that decision.

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

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

4. 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.’

5. 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’).

6. 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.

7. 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.

8. 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."

9. 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."

10. 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."

11. 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.

12. 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

13. The Appellant’s notice of appeal dated 17 July 2025 relies on the following grounds as reasons for the appeal: a. His inability to fully utilise the previous trainee licenses due to exceptional and unforeseeable personal circumstances. On 15 October 2024, he suffered the tragic loss of his father ‘ a deeply distressing event that affected my mental health and ability to maintain focus on my training’. He had to travel to Pakistan shortly afterwards to support his grieving mother which resulted in unavoidable time away from his ADI preparation. b. He would be pleased to provide supporting documentation to confirm his reduced ability to train and instruct; c. Despite the challenges, he has remained committed to qualifying. He participated in the ADI Part 3 test on 17 July 2025 and was unsuccessful. He now needs to get further training with his learner pupils. Granting the third trainee licence would provide the necessary continuity in instruction and significantly increase his chances of success. d. Allowing a trainee who has already invested significant time and effort – who has been hindered by circumstances beyond their control – to complete their training aligns with the public interest and the legislative intention of the ADI system.

14. The Appellant’s notice of appeal also stated his desired outcome of the appeal is to be granted ‘ a six month extension of his trainee licence’.

15. Additionally in the Appellant’s representations to the Registrar he also set out that: ‘ If my application for a further trainee licence is refused, I will lose the opportunity to continue delivering a practical instruction in the lead-up to my test. This will significantly hinder my ability to properly prepare and gain sufficient instructional experience which is critical for passing the Part 3 examination’.

16. The Registrar’s notice of refusal dated 14 June 2024 states the reasons for the refusal as: a. The Appellant failed to comply with the conditions of the first licence. b. The Appellant had already been granted two trainee licences of six months duration each, 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.

17. The Registrar’s statement of case dated 27 November 2025 resists the appeal. The Registrar 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. 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 him to continue to give paid instruction until determination of the appeal (para 6(ii)). c. Since passing his driving ability test the Appellant has failed the instructional ability test twice, not completed one test booked on 8 January 2025 due to the candidate failing to attend the test centre and cancelled 2 more such tests booked for 29 November 2024 and 3 December 2024 (Annex A). 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. 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

18. I considered a bundle of evidence containing 21 electronic pages, including the Appellant’s full trainee licence history from the registrar.

19. The case was listed for an oral hearing at the Appellant’s request, however the Appellant did not attend. I am satisfied that I can properly determine the issues without a hearing within rule 32(1)(b) of The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009 (as amended). I therefore proceeded to decide the case on the papers. Conclusions

20. I have considered the Appellant’s points of appeal. I accept that the Appellant’s personal circumstances (despite the fact that he had not provided corroborating evidence). I accept that his bereavement and his caring responsibilities for his mother will have impacted his ability and availability to train during the period of his trainee licences.

21. Nevertheless, 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.

22. I note that the Appellant has already had the benefit of two trainee licences covering a period of twelve months from 10 June 2024 to 09 June 2025. 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 7 months).

23. I further note that had the third trainee licence been granted this would have expired at the beginning of December 2024, ie before the consideration of this Appeal.

24. I also note that the Appellant passed his Part 1 test on 24 January 2024 and so the two-year period within which he must have passed both the Part 2 and Part 3 tests will expire by the 23 January 2026 – ie in 16 days time (he has a test booked for 23 January 2026).

25. The Appellant has therefore had the benefit of being able to train by giving instruction for payment for an additional period of almost 7 months. Notably exceeding both his stated desired appeal outcome of an extension of 6 months. I reiterate that the fixed statutory maximum period within which he must pass the Part 3 test expires in just 16 days.

26. I am not persuaded that the Registrar’s decision was wrong in any way. In all the circumstances, the appeal is dismissed. Signed Tribunal Judge Kiai Date: 8/1/2026