Raheel Akhtar v The Registrar for Approved Driving Instructors

NCN: [2026] UKFTT 00684 (GRC) Case Reference: FT/D/2025/0510 First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) Transport Decided without a hearing Decision given on: 12 May 2026 Before JUDGE HEALD Between RAHEEL AKHTAR Appellant and THE REGISTRAR FOR APPROVED DRIVING INSTRUCTORS Respondent Decision: There is no reasonable prospect of the Appellant's case, or part of it, succeeding and therefore the appeal is struck out by rule 8(3)(c) The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009. REASONS

1. This appeal is brought pursuant to the Road Traffic Act 1988 ("the Act"). It relates to a decision made by the Respondent ("the Registrar") dated 11 April 2025 ("the Decision") to refuse the Appellant's request for a third trainee licence.

2. The Registrar opposed the appeal and on 23 December 2025 applied for it to be struck out by rule 8(3)(c) The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009 ("2009 Rules") on the grounds that, on 22 December 2025, the Appellant had failed the institutional ability/part 3 test for a 3rd time.

3. A person may only provide paid driving instruction if their name is on the Register or if they hold a licence by section 129(1) of the Act and in accordance with The Motor Cars (Driving Instruction) Regulations 2005 ("the 2005 Regs"). To qualify as an Approved Driving Instructor an applicant is required to pass a Qualifying Examination. This is in 3 parts namely part 1 being a written examination, the driving ability and fitness test in part 2 and the instructional ability and fitness test in part

3. Three attempts only are allowed at each part. Reg 14 of the 2005 Regs states:- "14. A licence shall remain in force until— (a)the expiration of a period of 6 months commencing on the date of the grant, or (b)the day immediately following the day on which the holder of the licence failed the instructional ability and fitness test at the third attempt, whichever shall first occur"

4. Having passed part 2 the Appellant was issued with two 6 month licences. The Appellant then requested a 3rd licence. The Registrar told the Appellant that he was considering refusing this request about which on 7 April 2025 the Appellant made representations. The Registrar then notified the Appellant of the Decision and this appeal is from that Decision.

5. On 23 December 2025 an application was made (copied to the Appellant) seeking the striking out of the appeal by rule 8(3)(c) 2009 Rules on the basis that the Appellant had failed part 3 for a 3rd time on 22 December 2025 and reg 14(b) of the 2005 Regs.

6. Rule 8(3)(c) 2009 Rules provides that "The Tribunal may strike out the whole or a part of the proceedings if—(c) the Tribunal considers there is no reasonable prospect of the appellant's case, or part of it, succeeding." Rule 8(4) provides that "(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."

7. By Directions dated 13 March 2025 the Appellant was given an opportunity to make representations in relation to the proposed striking out. It appears there has been no response from the Appellant.

8. Rule 32(3) 2009 Rules permits the appeal to be disposed of without a hearing. Having considered the above and rule 2 2009 Rules in my view there is no reasonable prospect of the Appellant's case succeeding and the appeal is therefore struck out. SignedJudge Heald Date: 7 May 2026