A tribunal has dismissed an appeal against the refusal of a third trainee driving instructor licence
A trainee driving instructor has failed in her attempt to overturn a decision refusing her a third trainee licence, after a tribunal concluded that the regulator’s decision was justified.
The appeal was dismissed by the First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber), which considered the case without a hearing. The decision was issued on 30 January 2026 by Judge Dwyer and Judge Arnell.
The case concerned a decision made on 17 September 2025 by the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors to refuse Henna Haider Malik Ghulam a third trainee licence. The appellant had previously been granted two trainee licences under section 129 of the Road Traffic Act 1988. Those licences covered a combined period from 3 September 2024 to 2 September 2025. An application for a further licence was submitted on 21 August 2025.
Trainee licences allow applicants to give paid driving instruction while gaining experience ahead of qualifying as an Approved Driving Instructor. To qualify, candidates must pass three parts of the qualifying examination: a written test, a driving ability test, and an instructional ability test. Each part may be attempted up to three times, and the final test must be booked within two years of passing the first part.
In her appeal, the appellant argued that exceptional circumstances justified the grant of a third licence. She cited difficulties securing Part 3 test dates, the cancellation of a previously booked test in August 2025, childcare responsibilities, and health issues, including migraines. She maintained that these factors had restricted her ability to gain experience within the earlier licence periods.
The Tribunal reviewed the written evidence provided by both parties. It noted that medical records submitted related to a period before the first trainee licence was issued, and found it unclear what impact the health issues had on the appellant’s ability to work as a trainee instructor. While acknowledging wider issues with test availability, the Tribunal concluded that the circumstances did not amount to exceptional personal hardship, lost training time, or an inability to access pupils.
In its reasoning, the Tribunal emphasized that trainee licences are not intended to provide ongoing income or unlimited teaching time. It also noted that many candidates qualify without holding any trainee licence at all, using alternative training methods or unpaid practice.
The Tribunal further observed that the appellant had already benefited from a continuing licence while the appeal was pending, allowing additional time to gain experience and book a final test. Even if the appeal had succeeded, any third licence would have been restricted by the statutory deadline for completing the qualification process.
The Tribunal concluded that the Registrar’s decision was not wrong. The appeal was dismissed, and the refusal of a third trainee licence was upheld.