Kathryn Joanna White v Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors

The decision of the Tribunal is that the appeal is dismissed. Reasons

1. This is the appeal of the Appellant, Miss Kathryn White, against the decision of the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors (‘the Registrar’), conveyed in a letter of 21 August 2025, to refuse her request for a third trainee licence.

2. The matter was listed before me for determination on the papers and I was satisfied that it was fair and proper to proceed in that way. DVSA produced a bundle of essential documents. The statutory framework

3. The Road Traffic Act 1988 (‘ the Act ’), s123(1) prohibits the giving of paid driving instruction except where the instructor’s name is included in the Register of Approved Driving Instructors (‘the Register’) or he/she holds a trainee licence. Hereafter the usual abbreviation ‘ADI’ will be used.

4. Candidates for membership of the Register must fulfil a number of conditions. These include the requirement to pass an examination divided into three parts (‘the examination’): theory; driving ability and fitness; and instructional ability and fitness ( the Act , s125(3) (a)). They must apply for a part three test within two years of passing part one; if they do not, they must re-take the entire examination. Candidates who fail part three on three occasions must also re-take the entire examination. And in this event the current trainee licence comes to an end on the day following the third test. See the Motor Cars (Driving Instruction) Regulations 2005 (‘the Regulations’), reg 3(4)(c) and (d). The Regulations, reg 14(b)

5. By the Act , s129(1) it is provided that trainee licences are granted for the purpose of enabling prospective ADIs who have passed parts one and two of the examination to gain practical experience in driving instruction with a view to taking part three. Trainee licences are valid for six months only. The Registrar is expressly empowered to refuse to grant a trainee licence to an applicant to whom such a licence has previously been issued ( s129(3) ). It is clear from the language of s129 as a whole that trainee licences are not intended to serve as an alternative to registration.

6. The DVSA website (not, of course, a legal source) includes this advice: You should return your trainee licence to DVSA if you are not using it, for example because of a long period of illness. You will not get a refund, but DVSA will know that you have not had full use of the licence. This will be a factor in deciding whether to give you another licence in future . On the subject of applications for further trainee licences it states: You’re more likely to get another licence if you told DVSA you had stopped using the first, for example because of a period of illness. It’s unlikely that you’ll get another licence if you: • just want more time to pass the approved driving instructor (ADI) part 3 test • did not follow the rules for using your previous trainee licence These include a requirement to undertake a specified number of training hours over the first three months of the licence.

7. The effect of the Act , s129(6) is that, where a holder of a temporary licence applies during its currency for a fresh licence, the life of the original licence is extended until the commencement of the new licence or, if the application is refused and the holder appeals, until disposal of the appeal.

8. By the Act , s131(2) an appeal lies to the First-tier Tribunal against a decision to refuse an application for the grant of a licence. On the appeal, the Tribunal may make such order for the grant or refusal of the application as it sees fit ( s131(3) ). In a different but analogous statutory context in In the matter of the Bonas Group Pension Scheme [2011] UKUT B 33 (TCC) Warren J, sitting in the Upper Tribunal, held that there was nothing to constrain the first-instance Tribunal’s approach on appeal. Its function is simply to make its own decision on the evidence before it (which may differ from that before the statutory body whose decision is under challenge). Despite this latitude, however, high authority of general application recognises two important points. First, the burden is on an appellant to persuade the Tribunal that the relevant decision should be overturned or otherwise interfered with. Second, the Tribunal should give careful consideration to the reasons for the decision under challenge, given that Parliament has invested the relevant body with exclusive authority (subject to appeal) to make decisions on such matters. See eg R v Westminster Magistrates Court ex p Hope & Glory Public House Ltd [2011] EWCA Civ 31 , paras 39-48 (Toulson LJ). The key facts

9. The background facts can be summarised as follows. 9.1 Miss White passed parts one and two of the examination on 8 February and 21 March 2024 respectively. 9.2 On Miss White’s application, the Registrar granted her two consecutive trainee licences covering the period from 22 July 2024 to 21 July 2025. 9.3 On 17 July 2025 Miss White applied to the Registrar for a third licence. That application was refused by the letter of 21 August 2025, to which I have already referred. 9.4 Given the timing of the application for the third licence, the life of the second licence was extended by the Act , s129(6) to the date of disposal of this appeal (see above). 9.5 Miss White booked part three tests for 3 April, 15 July and 12 November 2025. Unfortunately, she was unsuccessful on the first two occasions. The third appointment was cancelled. 9.6 Miss White is now scheduled to take the part three test for the third time on 23 December this year. The appeal

10. In her well-presented appeal, Miss White made a number of persuasive points about the way in which the trainee licence system is currently operating. These suggest a miss-match between an (inferred) assumption, on which the system is based, of ready availability of slots for part three tests and the reality confronting her of such slots being exceedingly scarce. On her case, current circumstances make a third licence a necessity, and anything but a luxury.

11. The Registrar resists the appeal in his Response of 17 November 2025, stressing the importance of not allowing trainee licences to serve as an alternative to the registration system and the fact that eligibility to take the part three test is not conditional upon possession of a trainee licence. Generally, he contends that the decision which Miss White seeks to challenge was solidly based and there was no good reason to disturb it. Discussion and conclusions

12. I am not persuaded that there is a good reason to allow this appeal. Although I agree with the general remarks on the nature and purpose of the training licence system contained in the Response and on the Registrar’s website (see above), I accept that, at the time of her notice of appeal, Miss White identified telling grounds for seeking a third licence. But events have moved on. As already explained, the effect of the appeal is that the second licence was automatically extended until the date of the Tribunal’s decision. In other words, Miss White has secured the protection of ‘the badge’ for a consecutive period of well over 16 months to date. That is appreciably longer than the trainee licence scheme envisages and, given that her third part three test is scheduled for 23 December, there is no warrant for any further extension. Moreover, in the circumstances, dismissal of the appeal will not cause her any prejudice: whatever the outcome on 23 December, she will cease to have any use for a trainee licence after that date. As already stated, a third failure obliges the candidate to start again at part one. Outcome

13. For the reasons stated, I dismiss the appeal. In doing so, I wish Miss White well on the forthcoming test.

14. Although I dismiss this appeal, the Registrar would do well to reflect on my reasoning. It is not hard to envisage future cases in which the Tribunal may well be persuaded to uphold appeals based on cogent evidence of scarcity of part three test slots. (I took a different course here only because the Act , s129(6) has done my work for me by providing Miss White with the protection which she validly sought over the interval between the expiry of the second licence and her third part three test.) If the Registrar met a persuasive appeal of that kind with little more than pro-forma assertions based on outdated assumptions about the time reasonably required to get a trainee ADI through part three, he might not find himself on the receiving end of a disappointing result before the Tribunal. (Signed) Anthony Snelson Judge of the First-tier Tribunal Date: 11 December 2025