VadeLab
Entrar
Struck OutFirst-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber)·

Appeal Against Refusal of Driving Instructor Trainee Licence Struck Out by Tribunal

Processo nº

📌 Em resumo

In this case, the First-tier Tribunal decided to strike out an appeal concerning a trainee driving instructor licence. The Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors had refused a third licence, and the Tribunal agreed that the appellant was no longer eligible to take the required Part 3 test. This was because too much time had passed since they passed their Part 1 test, meaning the appeal had no chance of succeeding.

⚖️ Tese Jurídica

An appeal against a regulatory decision will be struck out if the appellant is no longer statutorily eligible for the licence sought, rendering the appeal without reasonable prospects of success.

Temas

driving instruction licencetrainee licenceregulatory appealstrike out applicationeligibility criteria

Dispositivos

Rule 8(3)(c) Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009Regulation 3(4)(c) Motor Cars (Driving Instruction) Regulations 2005

📖 O que diz a lei

Rule 8(3)(c) Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009

This rule allows the First-tier Tribunal to stop an appeal early if it believes the appeal has no reasonable chance of succeeding. In this case, the Tribunal used it because the appellant no longer met the basic requirements for the licence they were seeking.

Regulation 3(4)(c) Motor Cars (Driving Instruction) Regulations 2005

This regulation sets a time limit for people training to become approved driving instructors. It states that you must pass the final driving instructor test (Part 3) within two years of passing the first test (Part 1). If this time limit is exceeded, a person is no longer eligible for the licence.

Explicação em linguagem simples — não substitui orientação de um advogado.

📖 Resumo técnico

The First-tier Tribunal struck out an appeal against the refusal of a third trainee driving instruction licence. The appellant was no longer eligible to book a further Part 3 test, as more than two years had passed since passing Part 1, making the appeal without reasonable prospects of success.

📜 Ementa Documento oficial

The First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) struck out an appeal by an appellant against the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors' decision to refuse a third trainee driving instruction licence. The Tribunal, presided over by Judge McMahon, found that the appeal had no reasonable prospects of success under Rule 8(3)(c) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009. This was because the appellant was no longer eligible to book a further Part 3 test, as more than two years had elapsed since passing the Part 1 test, as per Regulation 3(4)(c) of the Motor Cars (Driving Instruction) Regulations 2005. The Tribunal affirmed it could not override statutory imperatives, despite the appellant's representations regarding time, effort, and money expended.

📚 Inteiro teor Documento oficial

NCN: [2026] UKFTT 00962 (GRC) Case No. FT/D/2026/0331 In the First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) Transport Before: Judge McMahon Appellant: [APPELLANT] Respondent: Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors Case Management Decision (The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009)

1. This appeal was an appeal against a decision of the Respondent dated 12 March 2026, to refuse the Appellant’s application for a third trainee driving instruction licence, having taken account of the Appellant’s written representations in a letter received by the Respondent on 13 February 2026.

2. On 11 May 2026, the Respondent made application, copied to the Appellant, that this appeal be struck out pursuant to Rule 8(3)(c) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009 (‘the Rules’) as having no reasonable prospects of success, since the Appellant was no longer eligible to book a further Part 3 test, more than two years having elapsed since he had passed his Part 1 test on 29 February 2024, pursuant to Regulation 3(4)(c) of the Motor Cars (Driving Instruction) Regulations 2005 (‘the Regulations’) and, therefore, a trainee licence should no longer be required by the Appellant.

3. In Case Management Directions dated 4 June 2026, issued by the Tribunal’s Legal Officer, the Appellant was reminded of the position advised by the Respondent and that the Tribunal was considering striking out his appeal, pursuant to the said Rule 8(3)(c) of the Rules, but inviting him, pursuant to Rule 8(4) of the Rules to make representations by 19 June 2026 as to why his appeal should not be struck out or to confirm that he wished to withdraw his appeal.

4. By way of email dated 11 June 2026, the Appellant asked that his appeal not be struck out but accepted that he was no longer eligible to book a further Part 3 test and accepted the limitations imposed on the Tribunal by statute but considered he should be allowed a final attempt to pass his Part 3 test, considering the time, effort and money expended by him.

5. The Tribunal cannot override the imperatives of statute enacted by Parliament.

6. Based on the representations of the Respondent and the Appellant, and the terms of the law, I grant the Respondent’s application in all the circumstances without further direction and strike out this appeal, pursuant to Rule 8(3)(c) of the Rules as having no reasonable prospects of success. Signed Judge McMahon Date: 25 June 2026

📊 Como os tribunais decidem casos parecidos

Entre 12 decisões semelhantes neste acervo:

Struck Out8 casos
Dismissed3 casos
Allowed1 caso

Panorama deste acervo — não é previsão do resultado do seu caso.

⚖️ O que costuma pesar em casos assim

✅ Costuma ser acolhido

  • The regulatory body did not properly consider the applicant's personal situation.
  • The regulatory body did not properly consider the applicant's medical information.

❌ Costuma ser rejeitado

  • The person appealing no longer meets the legal requirements for the licence.
  • The appeal has no reasonable chance of succeeding.
  • The person appealing has failed a required test (like the Part 3 driving test) three times.
  • The person appealing has used up all their allowed attempts for a required test.
  • The licence was sought for repeated renewals, going beyond its original purpose of providing temporary experience.

Padrões observados nos casos semelhantes deste acervo — cada processo é único.

❓ Perguntas frequentes

What did this decision decide?

The Tribunal decided to strike out an appeal against the refusal of a third trainee driving instruction licence, meaning the appeal could not continue.

Who was involved?

The case involved an appellant seeking a driving instructor licence and the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors as the respondent.

How did the court decide, and why?

The Tribunal decided to strike out the appeal because the appellant was no longer legally eligible to book a further Part 3 driving instructor test. More than two years had passed since they passed their Part 1 test, making the appeal have no reasonable chance of success.

Which laws or rules were applied?

The Tribunal applied Rule 8(3)(c) of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009 and Regulation 3(4)(c) of the Motor Cars (Driving Instruction) Regulations 2005.

What was the argument that mattered most?

The most important argument was that the appellant was no longer eligible to take the Part 3 test due to the time limit set by law, which meant they didn't need a trainee licence anymore and their appeal couldn't succeed.

Was the decision for or against the person who brought the case?

The decision was against the person who brought the case (the appellant), as their appeal was struck out.

What does this mean for someone in a similar situation?

If you are appealing a regulatory decision, especially regarding licences, you must ensure you still meet all the eligibility criteria and time limits set by law, or your appeal may be struck out.

What evidence or documents mattered?

The key documents were the Registrar's application to strike out the appeal, the appellant's representations, and the dates of the appellant's Part 1 test and the refusal of the licence.

Can a decision like this be appealed?

Generally, decisions from the First-tier Tribunal can be appealed to the Upper Tribunal, but there are strict rules and time limits for doing so, and permission to appeal is usually required.

Is it worth getting a solicitor for a case like this?

It is always advisable to seek advice from a qualified solicitor for your specific case, especially when dealing with complex regulatory rules and tribunal procedures, to understand your options and the likelihood of success.

Fonte oficial: First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) — ementa e inteiro teor reproduzidos das bases públicas do tribunal.Resumo, tese, resumo técnico e perguntas: elaborados por Inteligência Artificial com base na ementa e no acórdão oficiais.