Farhan Younus v Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors

Mr Younus is a trainee driving instructor who was granted trainee licences under section 129 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 (the “Act”), for two six-month periods from 7 October 2024 to 6 October 2025. He was refused a third trainee licence by a decision of the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors (‘the Registrar’) made on 4 November 2025. Mr Younus now appeals that decision.

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’). The whole qualifying examination must be completed within two years of passing Part 1. Only three attempts are allowed for each Part. The whole examination must be retaken if an applicant fails Part 2 or Part 3 three times or does not pass both within the two years.

If a candidate has passed Part 2, he may be granted a licence under section 129(1) of the Act:

This is commonly known as 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.

By section 129(3) of the Act

By section 129(8)(c) of the Act

By section 129(6) of the Act:-

Section 131 of the Act gives a right of appeal to this Tribunal. The Tribunal may make such order as it thinks fit. In doing so, the Tribunal must consider whether the Registrar’s decision was wrong. The Tribunal makes a fresh decision on the evidence available to it but must give 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 Mr Younus.

On 7 October 2025, the Registrar informed Mr Younus that he was considering refusing his application for a third trainee licence. Mr Younus made representations on 11 October 2025 that he had had two unsuccessful attempts to pass the Part 3 test and was currently undertaking further training. He also said that he had taken time off due to health and other family commitments.

On 4 November 2025, the Registrar notified Mr Younus that it refused his application for a third trainee licence. The notice of refusal states the reasons for the refusal as:

Mr Younus’s notice of appeal dated 10 November 2025 says that he feels that his trainee licence should be extended because he still has one more attempt left at the test.

The Registrar’s statement of case dated 5 February 2026 resists the appeal. The Registrar states that:

I considered a bundle of evidence containing 22 pages, including Mr Younus’s full trainee licence history from the Registrar.

In submissions, Mr Younus explained that he had left paid employment in order to prepare for his Part 3 test and that, during this period, he had incurred ongoing financial commitments including car finance, fuel, insurance and training costs. He relies upon the trainee licence as his sole source of income.

He further stated that his adult son had suffered significant mental health difficulties over a period of several years, including episodes of suicidal ideation. This had required Mr Younus to provide ongoing support, including attending appointments and counselling sessions. He explained that this had had a substantial impact on his own mental health and had impacted his ability to fully prepare for the test. Mr Younus stated that he was not aware that he could apply to suspend his trainee licence.

He thinks that he was not ready for the two attempts at the test that he failed. He stated that only in the six months preceding the hearing had his son’s condition stabilised, enabling him to give sustained attention to his training and is now more confident in his ability to pass.

He said that he cancelled the test scheduled for 23 February 2026 only because he had mistakenly scheduled it for the wrong test centre. He was then allocated a test on 16 March but this was cancelled by the DVSA.

Mr Younus passed his Part 1 test on 31 January 2024 and Part 2 test on 18 June 2024. Mr Younus’s first trainee licence was granted on 7 October 2024 for a period of six months. Mr Younus’s second trainee licence was due to expire on 6 October 2025.He failed his Part 3 test on 31 March 2025 and 20 August 2025. During this period, his ability to prepare for the test was negatively impacted by his caring responsibilities for his son.

He cancelled a test scheduled for 23 February 2026 because he had made an error in booking at the wrong test centre. He was then allocated a test for 16 March 2026 but this was cancelled by the DVSA. A final attempt at the test was scheduled for 16 April 2026.

Following the hearing, after I had made my decision but before I had finalised these written reasons, Mr Younus emailed the Tribunal attempting to withdraw his appeal because he had failed the test on 16 April. I had already made my decision, so it is not now possible to withdraw.

I considered Mr Younus’s points of appeal.

The six month period of trainee licences is set on the basis that this is considered to be an adequate period to prepare for the Part 3 test. Trainee licence holders can apply for a suspension of their licence if circumstances prevent them using it to prepare for the Part 3 test.

Mr Younus has already had the benefit of two trainee licences covering a period of twelve months. Additionally, by applying for a third trainee licence Mr Younus has had the benefit of s.129(6)(b) of the Act extending the first trainee licence until this appeal is disposed of (i.e. a further period of over six months). Had the third trainee licence been granted this would have expired before the consideration of this Appeal.

Mr Younus passed his Part 1 test on 31 January 2024.

Mr Younus has therefore had the benefit of being able to train by giving instruction for payment for an additional period exceeding both:

It is not necessary to hold a trainee licence in order to either prepare for or to take the Part 3 test – only to receive payment for providing lessons. A trainee licence must not become an alternative to qualification by passing the Part 3 test. It was not the intention of Parliament that trainee licences be renewed until all attempts at passing Part 3 have been taken.

Whilst it is common for holders of trainee licences to give up paid employment, the Registrar is not wrong to disregard the fact that a trainee would be financially disadvantaged by the refusal of a third (or indeed second) licence. This is not a reason to extend the usual six month period of the licence.

The Registrar did not have the information provided in submissions when making its decision. I nevertheless take it into account when deciding whether the decision was wrong. It is clear that Mr Younus’ ability to prepare for the test was impacted by his caring responsibilities. That is a factor that should be taken into account when considering whether to grant a third licence.

However, Mr Younus has already had more time to prepare for the test than would have been available had a third licence been granted in October 2025. He has confirmed that his training has not been impacted over the past six months.

Taking all of that into account, whilst it may have been wrong to refuse the third licence in October 2025, it would also be wrong to extend the licence today: Mr Younus has now had an uninterrupted six months to prepare for the test.

I therefore dismiss this appeal.