Alisdair John Scott Gray v The Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors

1. The Appellant lodged his appeal using the GRC1 form on 12 th August 2025.

2. On 25 th September 2025, the Respondent filed a GRC5 inviting the Tribunal to strike out the appeal under Rule 8(3)(c) on the basis that the appeal has no reasonable prospects of success. The Respondent stated that Regulation 14(b) of the Motor Cars (Driving Instruction) Regulations stipulates that a trainee licence expires the day following the trainee’s third unsuccessful attempt at the instructional ability test and that, according to his records, the Appellant has failed that test for the third time on 24 th September 2025.

3. On 26 th September 2025, Legal Officer Haji gave the following directions: ‘1. The Respondent has informed the Tribunal that you have failed in your final attempt at the Part 3 Test, that is the practical instructional ability and fitness test.

2. The Tribunal can only do what Parliament allows. Parliament has decided that a person cannot hold a trainee licence once they have, on three occasions, failed to pass the instructional ability and fitness test.

3. Therefore, the Tribunal is considering striking out your appeal on the ground of lack of reasonable prospects of your appeal succeeding pursuant to Rule 8(3)(c) of The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009. Before the Tribunal considers whether to strike out your appeal Rule 8(4) provides an opportunity for you to provide representations.

4. By no later than 10 October 2025 you should provide to the Tribunal: 4.1 Any representations as to why you consider the Tribunal should not strike out your appeal; OR 4.2 Confirmation you wish to withdraw your appeal.

5. A Registrar, Judge or Legal Officer will consider your appeal again on a date after 10 October 2025’.

4. The Appellant failed to respond to the Tribunal’s directions.

5. The Tribunal Procedure (First-tier Tribunal) (General Regulatory Chamber) Rules 2009 state: ‘8. (3) The Tribunal may strike out the whole or a part of the proceedings if— (a) the appellant has failed to comply with a direction which stated that failure by the appellant to comply with the direction could lead to the striking out of the proceedings or part of them; (b) the appellant has failed to co-operate with the Tribunal to such an extent that the Tribunal cannot deal with the proceedings fairly and justly; or (c) the Tribunal considers there is no reasonable prospect of the appellant's case, or part of it, succeeding’.

6. I conclude that the test under Rule 8(3)(c) is met: there is no reasonable prospect of the Appellant’s case succeeding. I accept the Respondent’s evidence that the Appellant failed his third attempt at the test on 24 th September 2025 (the Appellant has been given the opportunity to dispute this and has not done so). As such, and in accordance with Regulation 14(b) of the Motor Cars (Driving Instruction) Regulations, the Appellant is no longer permitted to take further instructions for reward or payment. As such his appeal must fail.

7. The overriding objective in Rule 2 of the Procedure Rules requires the Tribunal to deal with cases fairly and justly. For completeness, I add that I find it is fair and just to strike out the proceedings. The Appellant has had the opportunity to let the Tribunal know if he disputes the Respondent’s claim that he has failed the instructional ability test for a third time. He has not provided any explanation for the failure to respond. He has not provided any reason why the appeal should not be struck out. Signed Date: Gilda Kiai 1 st December 2025