Dareen Meikle v Registrar for Approved Driving Instructors

Introduction

1. This is an appeal against a decision of the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors (‘the Registrar’) made on 19 March 2025 to refuse to grant the Appellant a third trainee licence.

2. Neither party attended. The clerk attempted to contact the Appellant by telephone at the beginning of the hearing but there was no reply. I was satisfied that both parties had been given notice of the hearing and that it was in the interests of justice to proceed in their absence.

3. I was informed following the hearing and before any decision had been promulgated that by GRC5 dated 1 October 2025 the Registrar had applied to strike out the appeal on the basis that the appellant had failed his third and final attempt at the Part 3 instructional ability test on 30 September 2025.

4. By directions from the Registrar dated 10 October 2025 the Appellant has been given the opportunity to make representations on why the appeal should not be struck as having no reasonable prospects of success by no later than 24 October 2025. I therefore waited until any representations had been received before making a decision on the appeal. The appellant did not provide any representations. Legal framework

5. The grant of a trainee licence enables applicants to provide instruction for payment before they are qualified.

6. A trainee licence may be granted in the circumstances set out in s. 129 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 (‘ the Act ’) and the Motor Cars (Driving Instruction) Regulations 2005.

7. A 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.’

8. In order to qualify as an Approved Driving Instructor, applicants must pass the Qualifying Examination. This comprises: the written examination (‘Part 1’); the driving ability and fitness test (‘Part 2’); and the instructional ability and fitness test (‘Part 3’).

9. Three attempts are permitted at each part. The whole examination must be completed within 2 years of passing Part 1, failing which the whole examination has to be retaken.

10. 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.

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. Factual background to the appeal

13. The Appellant passed Part 1 of the Qualifying Examination on 18 September 2023 and passed Part 2 on 14 December 2023. The Appellant applied for two trainee licences which were granted and were valid from 26 February 2024 to 17 May 2025

14. On 16 February 2025, the Appellant applied for a third trainee licence. As the Appellant applied before the licence expired, this means that, at the date of the hearing, the appellant had been the beneficiary of a trainee licence for 1 year and almost 8 months.

15. The DVSA cancelled a Part 3 exam booked for 8 May 2024. The Appellant took and failed his first attempt at the Part 3 exams on 9 July 2024 and failed the second attempt on 12 December 2024. The Appellant cancelled Part 3 exams booked for 2 April 2025 and 28 July 2025.

16. The Appellant failed his final attempt on 30 September 2025. Appeal to the Tribunal

17. The grounds of appeal are, in summary: 17.1. The Appellant’s hip injury means that he has to take longer breaks between lessons and this limits the number of pupils he can complete in a day. His condition is a disability under the Equality Act and he is entitled to reasonable adjustments. 17.2. There have been delays in the testing process. On 18 March 2024 he booked the first test available which was 8 May 2024. On 18 April 2024 this was cancelled by the DVSA and rearranged for 9 July 2024. Due to financial difficulties because of not working due to his hip injury and childcare over the summer, he was unable to book his second test until 11 September 2024 when the first available slot was 12 December 2024. He booked his final test in early January 2025 and was informed that the final test was scheduled after the expiry of his licence.

18. The Registrar, in his response, states: 18.1. 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. 18.2. 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 Applicant has already had two licences which cover a period of 12 months. 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. 18.3. Since passing his driving ability test the Appellant has failed the instructional ability test twice and cancelled two more tests. Despite ample time and opportunity the Appellant has not been able to reach the required standard for qualification as an Approved Driving Instructor. 18.4. 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. Evidence

19. I read and took account of a bundle of documents. Discussion and conclusions

20. I accept that two months delay was caused when the DVSA cancelled the first test in May 2024. I take into account the two month delay that was caused over the summer by the Appellant’s financial difficulties and the need for him to carry out childcare.

21. The Appellant has already had the benefit of two trainee licences covering a period of 12 months in total. Other than the delay over the summer of 2024, the Appellant has not explained why the hip injury means that he needs another 6 months extension. I accept that he needs longer breaks between tests and that he has a limit to the number of pupils that he can takes, but an extra 6 months should have been long enough to make up for any missed preparation time.

22. 12 months should have been adequate time to prepare even noting the delays I outline above and the impact of the Appellant’s hip injury on the number of pupils that he can take. Further I note that the Appellant has had the benefit of a further period of over 7 months up to today.

23. The Appellant has, since the appeal was submitted, cancelled two Part 3 tests. Whilst there are no doubt legitimate reasons for cancelling those tests, this led to further time passing.

24. The overall period in which the Appellant has been able to give driving instruction should have provided a reasonable opportunity to obtain the practical experience envisaged by the Act . In any event, the Appellant has now failed his third attempt and must now retake all parts of the examination.

25. Having weighed all matters in the balance, the Appellant has not persuaded me that the Registrar’s decision was wrong in any way. In all the circumstances, I agree with the Registrar’s decision and the appeal is dismissed. Signed Sophie Buckley Date: 7 November 2025 Judge of the First-tier Tribunal