Sajith Pinsiri Senarathne Meththasingha Arachchige v Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors

Introduction

1. 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 one six-month period from 29 April 2024 to 28 October 2024, and a second was granted covering the period 8 November 2024 to 7 May 2025. He was refused a third trainee licence by a decision of the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors (‘the Registrar’) made on 3 June 2025. The Appellant now appeals that decision.

2. The Appellant attended the hearing via CVP but the Respondent, in line with its usual practice, did not attend and instead sought to rely on the written submissions alone. The Tribunal was satisfied that it was fair and just to conduct the hearing in this way.

3. 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. Legal Framework

4. The Appellant's name is not on the Register of Approved Driving Instructors ("the Register") and the Appellant 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 .

5. 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: ‘for the purpose of enabling a person to acquire practical experience in giving instruction in driving motor cars with a view to undergoing such part of the examination... as consists of a practical test of ability and fitness to instruct.’

6. 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’).

7. 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.

8. If a candidate has passed Part 2, they may be granted a trainee licence. 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.

9. By section 129(3) of the Act "The Registrar may refuse to grant a licence under this section to an applicant to whom such a licence has previously been issued."

10. By section 129(8) (c) of the Act "before deciding whether or not to refuse the application, the Registrar must take into consideration any such representations made within that period."

11. By section 129(6) of the Act :- "Notwithstanding any provision of regulations made by virtue of subsection (5) above prescribing the period for which a licence is to be in force, where a person applies for a new licence in substitution for a licence held by him and current at the date of the application, the previous licence shall not expire— (a)until the commencement of the new licence, or (b) if the Registrar decides to refuse the application, until the time limited for an appeal under the following provisions of this Part of this Act against the decision has expired and, if such an appeal is duly brought, it is finally disposed of."

12. 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.

13. 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 Appeal

14. The Appellant’s notice of appeal dated 12 June 2025 relies on the following grounds as reasons for the appeal: a. The Appellant has a medical condition that requires regular breaks between training sessions to use toilet facilities and so was unable to dedicate enough time to training during the periods of the previous trainee licences. b. It took a month for his driving school to assign him a vehicle after obtaining his first trainee licence. Additionally the vehicle he was assigned has had a number of breakdowns leading to further training time being missed. c. In July and August 2024 he had to travel and stay in Sri Lanka due to his mother’s critical illness. d. The DVSA cancelled his April 2025 Part 3 test date. e. Without a trainee licence he will lose access to his vehicle and won’t be able to get the required insurance to continue to train and take relevant tests.

15. The Appellant’s notice of appeal also stated that the desired outcome of the appeal is “ to allow (the) appeal and set aside the decision”.

16. Additionally in the Appellant’s representations to the Registrar by email of the 17 May 2025 it is set out that due to the Appellant’s health issue it is very hard to find a job to do because they require a break at least once every two hours, and so loss of the licence will directly financially effect the Appellant and their whole family.

17. The Registrar’s notice of refusal dated 3 June 2025 states the reasons for the refusal as: a. The evidence relating to medical appointments did not substantiate a claim of lost training time. b. The Appellant had already been granted two trainee licence each of six months duration which is considered to be a more than adequate period of time. c. It was not Parliament’s intention that the candidates should be issued licences for as long as it takes them to pass the examination and the trainee licence system must not be allowed to become an alternative to registration as a fully qualified Approved Driving Instructor.

18. The Registrar’s statement of case dated 31 October 2025 resists the appeal on essentially the same grounds as set out above previously. The Registrar further states that: a. The purpose of the provisions governing the issue of licences is to afford applicants the opportunity of giving instruction to members of the public whilst endeavouring to achieve registration. The system of issuing licences is not and must not be allowed to become an alternative to the system of registration (para 6(i)). b. The licence granted to applicants is not to enable the instructor to teach for however long it takes to pass the examinations, but to allow up to six months experience of instruction. This provides a very reasonable period in which to reach the qualifying standard in the examination and in particular, to obtain any necessary practical experience in tuition. Moreover, by virtue of the Appellant having applied for a third licence before the expiry date of the second, that licence has remained in force to the present time and will allow the Appellant to continue to give paid instruction until determination of the appeal; (para 6(ii)). c. Since passing the driving ability test the Appellant has failed the instructional ability test twice. Regrettably, DVSA cancelled one such test booked for 11 April 2025. Despite ample time and opportunity the Appellant has not been able to reach the required standard for qualification as an Approved Driving Instructor. (para 6(iii)). d. The refusal of a third licence does not bar the Appellant from attempting the instructional ability test of the Register examinations. They do not need to hold a licence for that purpose. The Appellant could attend a training course, or study and practice with an Approved Driving Instructor or give tuition on their own (provided that they do not receive payment of any kind for this). These alternatives are used by some trainees who acquire registration without obtaining any licences at all (para 6(iv)). e. The Appellant has their final attempt at Part 3 booked for 4 December 2025. The evidence

19. We considered a bundle of evidence containing 26 numbered pages and heard from the Appellant. In summary the Appellant set out: a. That the Appellant was most concerned about insurance as without the trainee licence he cannot get insurance to take people for training for payment. b. As regards the Appellants medical condition he wanted to be clear that although there was no evidence of any required hospital stay or inability to drive, they nonetheless were not like other people as they could not be outside for more than two hours because of the need to use toilet facilities. The Appellant agreed the average lessons were between 60-90 minutes but said students often wanted longer and so caused difficulties for the reason previously given of needing toilet facilities at least every two hours. He however had no other evidence of this and was only able to guess that approximately 10 lessons were cancelled due to his condition during the 18+ months he had a trainee licence. c. During the first six month licence he had to travel to Sri Lanka because of a sick relative and so he lost approximately 6 weeks of training time as a result. However, he was then subsequently granted a second 6 month trainee licence and also has had the benefit of that being extended for a further period of over 6 months because of the appeal. d. Lastly the Appellant wanted the Tribunal to know the considerable difficulty he has had in obtaining test dates that are set by the DVSA and had they issued him an earlier date than 4 December 2025 then this appeal would not need to have taken place as he would either have qualified or failed his third and final chance at Part 3. Conclusions

20. We have considered the Appellant’s points of appeal.

21. 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 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.

22. We note that the Appellant has already had the benefit of two trainee licences . Additionally, by applying for a third trainee licence the Appellant has had the benefit of s.129(6) (b) of the Act extending the last trainee licence until this appeal is disposed of (i.e. a period of over 12 months).

23. We further note that had the third trainee licence been granted this would have expired at the beginning of November 2025, weeks before the consideration of this Appeal and so the Appellant has already benefitted from a longer period than they would have done otherwise.

24. It is not necessary for an individual to have a trainee licence in order to take the Part 3 test and some candidates take and pass part 3 without providing training for payment at all. However, that is not the case here where the Appellant has had over 18 months within which to conduct training for payment.

25. We accept that the Appellant’s personal medical circumstances may to some extent have impacted their availability to train during the period of their two previous trainee licences. However whilst the Tribunal sympathises with the Appellant’s medical condition, the evidence provided does not establish why it was impossible over the entire period the individual was licenced as a Trainee to conduct sufficient instruction, especially when driving training is an activity that is naturally episodic in nature that can easily accommodate regular breaks between lessons. Additionally, the Appellant has had triple the period within which to fit the same experience in that many do in just 6 months. The Tribunal notes that in the first licence period there was a continuous absence for 6 weeks due to the need to visit Sri Lanka because of a family illness, however a full second licence was granted after that and there has also been a further period of over six months provided as a consequence of this appeal. The Tribunal did not find the points relating to the availability or reliability of the Appellant’s vehicle persuasive as this was a matter largely within their control and which all trainee drivers must consider.

26. The Tribunal aware that it can be difficult to book a Part 3 test, and that both long waits as well as DVSA cancellations are more common than they should be. However, it is noted that the Appellant failed part 3 on the 22 November 2024, had the DVSA cancel a Part 3 test on 11 April 2025, then failed a second Part 3 test on 23 June 2025 and has a third attempt booked for 4 December 2025.

27. We also accept that the holding of a Trainee licence is necessary in order to maintain the necessary insurance needed when training by giving instruction for payment, but recognise that it is not necessary to provide instruction for payment in order to take and pass the Part 3 test.

28. The trainee licence provisions do not exist primarily to provide a source of income but instead exist to assist individuals in obtaining the full qualification necessary for a career as an ADI. It is also notable that these trainee licences are always time limited and there should be no expectation that additional licences after the first will always be granted. Individuals undergoing the process of training to be an ADI must therefore ensure that they have the necessary income to support themselves from other sources in light of these facts.

29. We note that the Appellant passed the Part 1 test on the 18 October 2023 and so the two-year period within which the Appellant must have passed both the Part 2 and Part tests had expired by the 17 October 2025.

30. 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. Signed Tribunal Judge T Barrett Date: 25/11/2025