Elyas Hussain v Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors

The Appellant is a trainee driving instructor who was granted a trainee licence under section 129 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 (the “Act”), for a six-month period that ran from 2 June 2025 to 1 December 2025.

They were refused a second trainee licence by a decision of the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors (‘the Registrar’) made on 12 January 2026.

The Appellant now appeals that decision.

The parties have agreed to a paper determination of the appeal. The Tribunal is satisfied that it 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).

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 by us to any specific submission or evidence does not mean it has not been considered.

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

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:

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, 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.

If a candidate has passed Part 2, they may be granted a trainee licence if they meet all the relevant conditions (including as set out in s.129(2)(b) the requirement in s.125(3)(e) that the individual is a fit and proper person).

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 and the statutory framework does not require persons to hold trainee licences when undertaking the Part 3 exam.

By section 129(3) of the Act

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

By section 129(6) of the Act:-

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.

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 Appellant’s notice of appeal dated 15 January 2026 relies on the following grounds as reasons for the appeal:

The Appellant’s notice of appeal also stated that the desired outcome of the appeal is to obtain “another pink badge whilst waiting for part 3 to become available”.

The Appellant’s representations to the Registrar of the 22 November 2025 set out essentially the same grounds as those in the Notice of Appeal.

The Registrar’s notice of refusal dated 12 January 2026, takes the representations made by the Appellant into consideration and states the reasons for the refusal as:

The Registrar’s statement of case dated 19 March 2026 resists the appeal. The Registrar states that:

We considered a bundle of evidence containing 23 numbered pages.

The Appellant has provided little in the way of explanation as to their reasoning behind why a further trainee licence should be granted, and that which has been provided amounts to assertions only with no wider or independent supporting evidence.

The Appellant has only had the benefit of a single six month trainee licence period. However 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. Indeed, some individuals pass part 3 without ever having the benefit of a Trainee licence. The Appellant mentions they would like more time to concentrate on and get more training but has provided no evidence supporting these assertions that they have not in the initial six month period had sufficient experience or students.

The Appellant has failed to respect a core requirement of the Trainee Licence granted to them in that they did not undertake the required 20 hours of training within the relevant period. This was completed late before the expiry of the Trainee licence but no specific application was made as regards this failing to our knowledge, and it is unclear what (if any) explanation the Appellant has for this failing. The Appellant mentions reasons for a delay but it is unclear whether they meant in terms of progressing to the Part 3 test generally or just specifically as regards the additional training requirements. In any event the information provided in this regard is limited to bare assertions without any supporting or supplementary evidence such as regards the Appellant’s break from teaching and the underlying reasons for it.

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 Trainee licence is designed solely for the “purpose of enabling a person to acquire practical experience in giving instruction in driving motor cars”, it is not designed to (and cannot be allowed to) become a valid alternative to obtaining full qualification and/or a method for providing a regular income. The Trainee licence is designed as a specifically time limited and predominantly ‘one-off’ in nature training facility, it should not be seen by individuals as a profession itself or as a continuous route into a profession. Whilst individuals are entitled to (and do) derive an income from teaching whilst relying on a Trainee licence, that is designed to be an exceptional and temporary circumstance because the purpose of the licence is to provide necessary experience and any other benefit such as income is incidental.

We are aware that it can be difficult to book a Part 3 test, but that in itself is not a reason to grant further licences given it is not necessary to have such a licence in order to take and pass the Part 3 test. We also note that there was delay on the part of the Appellant in booking Part 3.

The Appellant has not persuaded us that the Registrar’s decision was wrong in any way. In all the circumstances, we agree with the Registrar’s decision and dismiss this appeal.