{"id":561543,"date":"2026-04-14T22:14:34","date_gmt":"2026-04-14T20:14:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/jurisprudences\/beatrice-marie-flaherty-v-the-registrar-of-approved-driving-instructors\/"},"modified":"2026-04-14T22:14:34","modified_gmt":"2026-04-14T20:14:34","slug":"beatrice-marie-flaherty-v-the-registrar-of-approved-driving-instructors","status":"publish","type":"kji_decision","link":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/jurisprudences\/beatrice-marie-flaherty-v-the-registrar-of-approved-driving-instructors\/","title":{"rendered":"Beatrice Marie Flaherty v The Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"kji-decision\">\n<div class=\"kji-full-text\">\n<p>The Tribunal dismiss the appeal. The Registrar\u2019s refusal to issue the Appellant with a third trainee driving instructor licence under section 129 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 is upheld. REASONS FOR DECISION Introduction: 1. This is an appeal brought under section 129 Road Traffic Act 1988 (\u201cRTA 1988\u201d) against the Registrar\u2019s decision dated 06 November 2025 to refuse the appellant\u2019s application for a third trainee driving instructor licence. 2. The appeal was listed for an oral hearing on 23 March 2026 and despite attempts by the Tribunal administration to make contact, the appellant has failed to attend the arranged hearing. I have considered the hearing bundle, the appellant\u2019s representations, and the Registrar\u2019s evidence. I am satisfied that the appeal can justly be determined on the papers under rule 27 of the Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009. Background: 3. The appellant has never been registered as an Approved Driving Instructor (\u201cADI\u201d). She previously held two trainee licences, running between 07 October 2024 and 06 October 2025, thereby affording her 12 months of trainee status for the purposes of gaining instructional experience. 4. On 19 September 2025, she applied for a third trainee licence. On 30 September 2025, the Registrar issued a notice of intention to refuse and invited representations. The appellant responded on 12 October 2025, stating that test booking difficulties impeded her progress. 5. The Registrar refused the application by email on 06 November 2025. The appellant appealed promptly thereafter. 6. The test history in the bundle shows (i) one failed Part 3 test on 03 July 2025, and (ii) a further Part 3 test booked for 20 February 2026. The Issues: 7. The central issue is whether the Registrar\u2019s refusal of a third trainee licence was lawful, fair, reasonable, and proportionate, having regard to section 129 RTA 1988 and established ADI licensing principles. 8. The sub-issues include:(a) whether the appellant has demonstrated exceptional circumstances warranting a third licence;(b) whether the two previous licences already provided sufficient opportunity to gain experience consistent with the statutory purpose;(c) whether the Registrar correctly applied long-established criteria that trainee licences are short-term, temporary arrangements and should not become rolling extensions;(d) whether the pending Part 3 test materially alters the statutory analysis; and(e) whether the appellant has produced objective evidence of impaired training opportunity. The Law: 9. Under s.123 RTA 1988, driving instruction for payment is prohibited unless the instructor is registered or holds a valid trainee licence. 10. Under s.129 RTA 1988, the Registrar may grant a trainee licence for a limited period (normally six months) to allow a trainee to obtain practical instructional experience before applying for full registration. The statutory scheme does not create any entitlement to multiple consecutive licences. 11. Chamber case law consistently emphasises:\u2022 two licences usually provide adequate opportunity;\u2022 a third licence should only be granted in exceptional or evidentially justified circumstances;\u2022 applicants must show demonstrable impairment of training progress not attributable to their own planning;\u2022 a trainee licence is not required to sit the Part 3 test. Evidence and Submissions: 12. The Registrar\u2019s reasoning is fully set out in the bundle. The Registrar notes the appellant had 12 months of trainee status; that she had undertaken only one Part 3 attempt; that she had not provided evidence of test booking delays or significant lost training time; and that the statutory purpose would be undermined by routinely allowing third licences. 13. The appellant\u2019s representations assert difficulty in securing Part 3 test dates, reliance on unpaid practice with a local driving school, and a need for a third licence to complete preparation. She has, however, provided no documentary evidence of test booking difficulties or other objective impediments. Findings: 14. Having considered the entirety of the evidence, I make the following findings: 15. First, the appellant had 12 months of trainee licence status. The statutory expectation is that six months is ordinarily sufficient for a trainee to gain the necessary experience. A full year is therefore more than the statutory baseline and aligns with the Registrar\u2019s long-established criteria. 16. Second, the appellant has provided no independent evidence of test booking delays, cancellation patterns, lost training time, or other material impediments beyond her own assertions. While I accept that obtaining Part 3 test dates can be challenging, the Tribunal must decide cases based on evidence rather than assertion. 17. Third, the fact that a Part 3 test was booked for 20 February 2026 does not assist the appellant. A licence is not required in order to sit the test, and the Registrar was entitled to take this into account. 18. Fourth, I accept the Registrar\u2019s position that trainee licences are intended to be temporary, not rolling extensions allowing trainees to instruct indefinitely without registration. Granting consecutive licences without clear evidence of exceptional circumstances would undermine that statutory purpose. 19. Fifth, on the evidence before me, I find that the Registrar\u2019s decision was lawful, rational, and fully aligned with the proportionality principles that apply to trainee licensing decisions. Nothing in the appellant\u2019s material displaces the Registrar\u2019s conclusions or renders the decision unfair or unreasonable. Conclusion: 20. For all of the above reasons, I find that the appellant has not established any basis for the Tribunal to interfere with the impugned decision. I am satisfied that the Registrar\u2019s refusal was fair, reasonable, and proportionate in the circumstances. 21. The appeal is therefore dismissed. Brian Kennedy KC. 23 March 2026.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<hr class=\"kji-sep\" \/>\n<p class=\"kji-source-links\"><strong>Sources officielles :<\/strong> <a class=\"kji-source-link\" href=\"https:\/\/caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk\/ukftt\/grc\/2026\/466\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">consulter la page source<\/a><\/p>\n<p class=\"kji-license-note\"><em>Open Justice Licence (The National Archives).<\/em><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The Tribunal dismiss the appeal. The Registrar\u2019s refusal to issue the Appellant with a third trainee driving instructor licence under section 129 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 is upheld. REASONS FOR DECISION Introduction: 1. This is an appeal brought under section 129 Road Traffic Act 1988 (\u201cRTA 1988\u201d) against the Registrar\u2019s decision dated 06 November 2025 to refuse the&#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"featured_media":0,"template":"","meta":{"_crdt_document":""},"kji_country":[7608],"kji_court":[7631],"kji_chamber":[],"kji_year":[7610],"kji_subject":[7646],"kji_keyword":[7633,7622,7637,7641,7639],"kji_language":[7611],"class_list":["post-561543","kji_decision","type-kji_decision","status-publish","hentry","kji_country-royaume-uni","kji_court-first-tier-tribunal-general-regulatory-chamber-transport","kji_year-7610","kji_subject-divers","kji_keyword-appellant","kji_keyword-evidence","kji_keyword-licence","kji_keyword-registrar","kji_keyword-trainee","kji_language-anglais"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v27.5 (Yoast SEO v27.5) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-premium-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Beatrice Marie Flaherty v The Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/jurisprudences\/beatrice-marie-flaherty-v-the-registrar-of-approved-driving-instructors\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"zh_CN\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Beatrice Marie Flaherty v The Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"The Tribunal dismiss the appeal. The Registrar\u2019s refusal to issue the Appellant with a third trainee driving instructor licence under section 129 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 is upheld. REASONS FOR DECISION Introduction: 1. This is an appeal brought under section 129 Road Traffic Act 1988 (\u201cRTA 1988\u201d) against the Registrar\u2019s decision dated 06 November 2025 to refuse the...\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/jurisprudences\/beatrice-marie-flaherty-v-the-registrar-of-approved-driving-instructors\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"\u9884\u8ba1\u9605\u8bfb\u65f6\u95f4\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"4 \u5206\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/zh-hans\\\/jurisprudences\\\/beatrice-marie-flaherty-v-the-registrar-of-approved-driving-instructors\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/zh-hans\\\/jurisprudences\\\/beatrice-marie-flaherty-v-the-registrar-of-approved-driving-instructors\\\/\",\"name\":\"Beatrice Marie Flaherty v The Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/zh-hans\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2026-04-14T20:14:34+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/zh-hans\\\/jurisprudences\\\/beatrice-marie-flaherty-v-the-registrar-of-approved-driving-instructors\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"zh-Hans\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/zh-hans\\\/jurisprudences\\\/beatrice-marie-flaherty-v-the-registrar-of-approved-driving-instructors\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/zh-hans\\\/jurisprudences\\\/beatrice-marie-flaherty-v-the-registrar-of-approved-driving-instructors\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/zh-hans\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Jurisprudences\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/zh-hans\\\/jurisprudences\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":3,\"name\":\"Beatrice Marie Flaherty v The Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/zh-hans\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/zh-hans\\\/\",\"name\":\"Kohen Avocats\",\"description\":\"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat p\u00e9naliste \u00e0 Paris, intervient exclusivement en droit p\u00e9nal pour la d\u00e9fense des particuliers, notamment en mati\u00e8re d\u2019accusations de viol. Il assure un accompagnement rigoureux d\u00e8s la garde \u00e0 vue jusqu\u2019\u00e0 la Cour d\u2019assises, veillant au strict respect des garanties proc\u00e9durales.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/zh-hans\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/zh-hans\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"zh-Hans\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/zh-hans\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Kohen Avocats\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/zh-hans\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"zh-Hans\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/zh-hans\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/01\\\/Logo-2-1.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/01\\\/Logo-2-1.webp\",\"width\":2114,\"height\":1253,\"caption\":\"Kohen Avocats\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/kohenavocats.com\\\/zh-hans\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Beatrice Marie Flaherty v The Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/jurisprudences\/beatrice-marie-flaherty-v-the-registrar-of-approved-driving-instructors\/","og_locale":"zh_CN","og_type":"article","og_title":"Beatrice Marie Flaherty v The Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors","og_description":"The Tribunal dismiss the appeal. The Registrar\u2019s refusal to issue the Appellant with a third trainee driving instructor licence under section 129 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 is upheld. REASONS FOR DECISION Introduction: 1. This is an appeal brought under section 129 Road Traffic Act 1988 (\u201cRTA 1988\u201d) against the Registrar\u2019s decision dated 06 November 2025 to refuse the...","og_url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/jurisprudences\/beatrice-marie-flaherty-v-the-registrar-of-approved-driving-instructors\/","og_site_name":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"\u9884\u8ba1\u9605\u8bfb\u65f6\u95f4":"4 \u5206"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/jurisprudences\/beatrice-marie-flaherty-v-the-registrar-of-approved-driving-instructors\/","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/jurisprudences\/beatrice-marie-flaherty-v-the-registrar-of-approved-driving-instructors\/","name":"Beatrice Marie Flaherty v The Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors - Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat en droit p\u00e9nal \u00e0 Paris","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/#website"},"datePublished":"2026-04-14T20:14:34+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/jurisprudences\/beatrice-marie-flaherty-v-the-registrar-of-approved-driving-instructors\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"zh-Hans","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/jurisprudences\/beatrice-marie-flaherty-v-the-registrar-of-approved-driving-instructors\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/jurisprudences\/beatrice-marie-flaherty-v-the-registrar-of-approved-driving-instructors\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Jurisprudences","item":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/jurisprudences\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Beatrice Marie Flaherty v The Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/#website","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/","name":"Kohen Avocats","description":"Ma\u00eetre Hassan Kohen, avocat p\u00e9naliste \u00e0 Paris, intervient exclusivement en droit p\u00e9nal pour la d\u00e9fense des particuliers, notamment en mati\u00e8re d\u2019accusations de viol. Il assure un accompagnement rigoureux d\u00e8s la garde \u00e0 vue jusqu\u2019\u00e0 la Cour d\u2019assises, veillant au strict respect des garanties proc\u00e9durales.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"zh-Hans"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/#organization","name":"Kohen Avocats","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"zh-Hans","@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Logo-2-1.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Logo-2-1.webp","width":2114,"height":1253,"caption":"Kohen Avocats"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}}]}},"jetpack_likes_enabled":false,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_decision\/561543","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_decision"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/kji_decision"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=561543"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"kji_country","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_country?post=561543"},{"taxonomy":"kji_court","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_court?post=561543"},{"taxonomy":"kji_chamber","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_chamber?post=561543"},{"taxonomy":"kji_year","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_year?post=561543"},{"taxonomy":"kji_subject","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_subject?post=561543"},{"taxonomy":"kji_keyword","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_keyword?post=561543"},{"taxonomy":"kji_language","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/kohenavocats.com\/zh-hans\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/kji_language?post=561543"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}