Tribunal extends trainee driving instructor's licence

Introduction

The First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) recently delivered a decision in the case of Imtiaz Ahmed vs Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors, where the appellant's appeal was allowed, resulting in the extension of his trainee licence. The case, cited as [2025] UKFTT 286 (GRC), was heard via the Cloud Video Platform on 27 February 2025, with the decision given on 7 March 2025 by Judge Scherbel-Ball.

Background

Imtiaz Ahmed, a trainee driving instructor, had previously been granted a trainee licence under section 129 of the Road Traffic Act 1988. His initial licence was valid from 29 January 2024 to 28 July 2024. Ahmed applied for a second trainee licence on 13 July 2024, which was subsequently refused by the Registrar on 14 August 2024. Ahmed appealed this decision, leading to the tribunal hearing.

The Appeal

Ahmed's appeal was based on several grounds. He had failed one part of the instructional ability test and had a subsequent test put on hold due to unavailability. Additionally, Ahmed cited personal circumstances, including commitments as an interpreter and community centre worker, as well as a medical condition that limited his training capacity. He argued that these factors, combined with the DVSA's guidance, justified the issuance of a second licence.

Registrar's Position

The Registrar opposed the appeal, stating that Ahmed had not met the conditions of his first licence, particularly regarding the completion of training objectives. The Registrar emphasized that the purpose of a trainee licence is to provide a limited period for gaining practical experience, not an indefinite extension to pass exams. Furthermore, the refusal of a second licence did not prevent Ahmed from taking the instructional ability test.

Tribunal's Analysis

The tribunal considered the evidence, including Ahmed's training records and medical documentation. Judge Scherbel-Ball noted the lack of clarity in the Registrar's refusal letter, which failed to specify the conditions Ahmed allegedly did not meet. The tribunal highlighted the statutory requirement for the Registrar to clearly state the grounds for refusal, which was not adequately fulfilled in this case.

Decision

Judge Scherbel-Ball found in favour of Ahmed, citing the Registrar's insufficient reasoning and the exceptional circumstances surrounding Ahmed's case. These included his medical condition, the delays in test availability, and the DVSA's cancellation of a scheduled test. The tribunal concluded that these factors justified extending Ahmed's trainee licence until 7 May 2025.

Conclusion

This case underscores the importance of clear communication and justification in administrative decisions, particularly when statutory requirements mandate specific grounds for refusal. The tribunal's decision reflects a balanced consideration of individual circumstances against regulatory standards.

Implications

The ruling may influence future cases involving trainee licences, highlighting the need for transparent decision-making by regulatory bodies. It also emphasizes the tribunal's role in ensuring fairness and accountability in administrative processes.