Dhillon vs Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors

This case concerned an appeal by Jaswant Dhillon against the decision of the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors to remove him from the register after failing three consecutive 'continued ability and fitness to give instruction' tests.

TLDR:

• Dhillon failed three consecutive tests required for driving instructors.
• He appealed the Registrar's decision to remove him from the register.
• The Tribunal upheld the Registrar's decision, dismissing the appeal.

The appellant, Jaswant Dhillon, was removed from the Register of Approved Driving Instructors by the Registrar after failing to pass three consecutive 'continued ability and fitness to give instruction' tests. The tests were conducted on 6th June 2022, 8th September 2022, and 30th January 2023. Dhillon appealed the decision, claiming that his performance in the last test was affected by having to find a pupil at the last minute, resulting in a full licence holder being used.

The appeal was determined at a panel paper hearing on 30th May 2024, with the Tribunal consisting of HHJ David Dixon, David Rawsthorn, and Stuart James. The Tribunal reviewed a bundle of evidence containing 25 pages and considered the relevant provisions of the Road Traffic Act 1988.

Section 125(5) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 requires approved driving instructors to submit to tests of continued fitness and ability. Failure to pass such tests can result in removal from the register under Section 128(2)(c) or (d) of the Act. Appeals against the conduct of a check test lie to the Magistrates' Court, while appeals against the Registrar's decision proceed as a re-hearing before the Tribunal.

The Tribunal noted that Dhillon accepted his failure in all three tests but sought to explain only the most recent failure. He argued that he was a good instructor and provided a key service to the migrant community, requesting another opportunity to prove his abilities.

The Tribunal, standing in the shoes of the Registrar, considered the evidence and the Registrar's reasons. It concluded that the repeated failures indicated that Dhillon was not teaching to the required standard and had not demonstrated improvement or learning from previous feedback.

In light of the evidence, the Tribunal agreed with the Registrar's decision to remove Dhillon from the register. The appeal was dismissed with immediate effect.

Legal representatives: None listed

Judicial Panel: HHJ David Dixon, David Rawsthorn, Stuart James

Case Citation Reference: [2024] UKFTT 457 (GRC)