First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber)

FT/D/2025/0558 - [2025] UKFTT 01235 (GRC)

Fecha: 15-Oct-2025

A summary of the relevant substantive legal provisions

A summary of the relevant substantive legal provisions

It is unlawful and a criminal offence to give paid instruction in the driving of a motor vehicle, unless the conditions set out in s. 123 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 are satisfied. The two conditions of most relevance to the appeals we hear are: (i) that the name of the person concerned has been entered on the Register of Approved Driving Instructors, (ADIs) or (ii) that the person concerned holds a Trainee Licence, issued under s. 129 of the 1988 Act.

To have your name on the Register it is necessary (i) to pass the Qualifying Examination and (ii) to meet the conditions set out in s. 125(3) of the 1988 Act.

The Qualifying Examination is in three parts. Part I is a written exam. Part II is a test of driving ability and fitness and Part III consists of a test of instructional ability and fitness. Candidates are allowed three attempts at each part and must attempt each part in numerical order. Failure of any part at the third attempt means that the candidate must start the whole process all over again. All three parts must be passed within 2 years of the date on which the candidate passed Part I. However an attempt at Part III can be made after the 2 year period has expired provided that the booking for that attempt was made within the 2 year period.

The emphasis here is my own.

The Motor Cars (Driving Instruction) Regulations 2005 (‘the 2005 Regulations’)

Regulation 13 (1) and (2)(d) of the 2005 Regulations provides that:

‘Additional conditions to be satisfied for the grant of a licence

13.—(1) To the conditions as to which the Registrar is required to be satisfied for the grant of a licence under section 129 of the Act, there are added the following conditions which shall have effect subject to paragraph (3) below and to regulation 3(6).

(2)

The additional conditions are—

…

(d)

that he has not failed the instructional ability and fitness test more than twice since he passed the written examination;’

Once, again, the emphasis here is my own.

The jurisdiction of the First-tier Tribunal

10.

Rule 8(3) and (4) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-Tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009 (‘the 2009 rules’), provides:

‘(3) The Tribunal may strike out the whole or a part of the proceedings if—

(a)

the appellant has failed to comply with a direction which stated that failure by the appellant to comply with the direction could lead to the striking out of the proceedings or part of them;

(b)

the appellant has failed to co-operate with the Tribunal to such an extent that the Tribunal cannot deal with the proceedings fairly and justly; or

(c)

the Tribunal considers there is no reasonable prospect of the appellant’s case, or part of it, succeeding.

…

(4)

The Tribunal may not strike out the whole or a part of the proceedings under paragraph (2) or (3)(b) or (c) without first giving the appellant an opportunity to make representations in relation to the proposed striking out.