Stephen Ormrod v The Register of Approved Driving Instructors

1. This appeal is brought by the Appellant pursuant to section 131(2) (a) Road Traffic Act 1988 (" the Act "). It relates to a Decision made by the Respondent ("the Registrar") dated 2 May 2025 ("the Decision") to refuse the Appellant's application for a third (trainee) Licence.

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

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 Licence issued by the Registrar pursuant to section 129(1) of the Act and in accordance with The Motor Cars (Driving Instruction) Regulations 2005.

4. To qualify as an Approved Driving Instructor ("ADI") an applicant is required to pass a Qualifying Examination. This is in 3 parts namely part 1 being a written examination, the driving ability and fitness test in part 2 and the instructional ability and fitness test in part 3. Three attempts are allowed at each part. A Licence relates to giving paid instruction and is not needed to be able to take part 3.

5. A Section 129(1) Licence may be granted by the Registrar once an applicant has passed part 2. This 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 referred to in section 125(3)(a) as consists of a practical test of ability and fitness to instruct."

6. 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." If he does so the he must tell the applicant and give particulars of the grounds on which he is considering the refusal. The applicant may make representation within certain time limits and by section 129(8) (c) of the Act "before deciding whether or not to refuse the application" the Registrar must take any such representations into consideration.

7. By section 129(4) of the Act if such an application is refused the Registrar must give notice of that in writing to the applicant and provide the grounds of refusal and 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." Role of the Tribunal

8. Section 131(2) of the Act provides that "A person who is aggrieved by a decision of the Registrar—(a)to refuse an application for the grant of a licence under this Part of this Act ...may appeal to the First-tier Tribunal"

9. Section 131 (3) of the Act provides that the Tribunal may make such order:- ( a)for the grant or refusal of the application or, (b)for the removal or the retention of the name in the register, or the revocation or continuation of the licence, (as the case may be) as it thinks fit.

10. The Appellant has the burden of proof in satisfying the Tribunal that the Registrar’s decision was wrong and conclusions are reached on the balance of probabilities. 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 being the person tasked with making such decisions (see Hope and Glory Public House Ltd, R (on the application of) v City of Westminster Magistrates Court & Ors [2011] EWCA Civ 31 (26 January 2011) . It is not the role of the Tribunal to carry out a procedural review of the Registrar's decision-making process but it does need to consider all the circumstances. Evidence and matters considered

11. For this Appeal I heard from the parties and considered the content of a bundle of 22 pdf pages. In this decision any page numbers indicated by their inclusion in brackets refer to pages of the bundle. Chronology

12. In summary and as agreed by the parties:- (a) the Appellant passed part 1 on 8 November 2023 and part 2 on 27 February 2024. (b) the Appellant was given a first Licence on 25 March 2024 (b) on 24 September 2024 the Appellant cancelled a part 3 test. (c) on 24 September 2024 the Appellant was given a second Licence. (d) on 11 March 2025 the Appellant applied for a third Licence. (e) on 25 March 2025 the Registrar told the Appellant that he was considering the refusal of a third Licence. (f) on 7 April 2025 the Appellant made representations. (g) on 2 May 2025 the Decision was made to refuse a third Licence.

13. This Appeal was commenced against the Decision 12 May 2025. Since then:- (a) on 15 May 2025 the Appellant failed part 3 for the first 1st time. (b) on 27 October 2025 the Appellant failed part 3 for a second time. (c) the Registrar provided a response on 1 December 2025. (d) on 3 December 2025 the Appellant's application to adjourn this appeal was refused.

14. The Appellant also told me that he has a further (and final) part 3 test booked for 3 February 2026 and as allowed that he has continued to give paid instruction since the Decision in May 2025. The Appellants position

15. In his representations the Appellant referred to ill health that prevented him taking a test and delays in being provided with test dates. In his appeal on 12 May 2025 and at the appeal hearing the Appellant said:- (a) his first part 3 on 10 April 2024 had to be put on hold. (b) he was unable to attend the date of the 24 September 2024 as he was ill and for a while there were no test dates available. (c) on 18 February 2025 he was told by DVSA a date could be given of 15 May 2025 but by this time his second Licence would have expired. (d) "...only being offered two dates in 13 months is making the qualifying process extremely difficult and stressful"

16. The Appellant refuted any suggestion that he was using the Licence as an alternative to registration. At the appeal he said that what he sought was a Licence but only until the 3 February 2026 to take him up to his third and final attempt at the part 3 test because if he passes it then he can gain registration and if he does not he cannot take the test again. In either scenario, he said, the need for or ability to have a Licence falls away at that point. The Registrar's position

17. The Registrar said that:- (a) the Appellant provided "no evidence of lost training time or a lack of pupils and has had the benefit of two trainee licences for twelve months." (b) a Licence is for the purpose of giving instruction while trying to achieve registration and "the system of issuing licences is not and must not be allowed to become an alternative to the system of registration" (c) a Licence is not given to enable an applicant to give paid lessons for "as long as it takes" to pass part 3. (d) 6 months is "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." (e) the Appellant has been able to carry on with the benefit of the second Licence pending the outcome of this appeal since the Decision (which is a period of in excess of an additional 6 months). (f) "since passing his driving ability test the Appellant has failed the instructional ability twice and cancelled one more such test booked for 24 September 2025...Despite ample time and opportunity the Appellant has not been able to reach the required standard for qualification as an Approved Driving Instructor"

18. Importantly, taking into account the outcome of this appeal, the Registrar also pointed out that:- "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" Review

19. I note that the Appellant has had the benefit of a Licence from the grant of the first one on 25 March 2024 to the date of this decision due to section 129(6) of the Act . This is a period of about 2 2 months. By section 129(6) the Appellant has been able to continue to operate with a Licence since March 2025 despite the Decision. If the Registrar had granted a third Licence it would have expired well before this appeal hearing.

20. I accept that for what ever reason there have been some delays in providing the Appellant with test dates but this was after he was unable to utilise the first one given on 24 September 2024.

21. I also accept that the Appellant was not engaged in a course of action designed to enable him to give paid instruction for as long as possible without the need to be registered as an ADI. However I did conclude that the Appellant wants to have a Licence to assist with his process of seeking to pass Part 3 and gain ADI registration and in particular up to his test date on 3 February 2026. I accept that from the Appellant's point of view that is a sensible approach to take and that, as a result of cancelling the first test date he was given, the first two Licences would have expired before he got to next test date in May 2025. However the Registrar is right to point out that the statutory purpose of a Licence is as set out in section 129(1) of the Act and is "... 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 referred to in section 125(3)(a) as consists of a practical test of ability and fitness to instruct" It is not the case that the Act provides Licences to those awaiting a part 3 test up to the date they pass or they fail on the 3rd occasion.

22. I took account and gave weight to the Registrar's view. The Registrar did consider the representations made and there was no material information provided about which the Registrar was not aware. On balance due to the above and in particular the length of time the Appellant had the benefit of a Licence I do not conclude that the Decision was disproportionate. Decision

23. For the reasons above the Appellant has not persuaded me that the Registrar’s decision was wrong and accordingly the appeal is dismissed. Signed Judge Heald Date: 29 January 2026