Nabeel Basri v Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency (DVSA)

Introduction

1. This is an appeal against the decision of the Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors to revoke the Appellant’s trainee licence issued under Section 129 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 .

2. The licence permitted the Appellant to give paid driving instruction while preparing for the Approved Driving Instructor (ADI) qualification.

3. On 24 April 2025, the Respondent discovered that the Appellant had been convicted of drink driving, resulting in a 12-month disqualification from driving, effective until 2 May 2026.

4. A previous offence for speeding on 18 July 2023 was also noted.

5. The Registrar revoked the licence on grounds of unsuitability and public confidence concerns.

6. The Appellant contends that the decision was disproportionate and that personal circumstances should have been considered. Legal Framework:

7. Section 123(1) Road Traffic Act 1988 prohibits giving paid instruction unless registered or licensed under s.129 . Section 129 provides for trainee licences but does not confer an absolute right to retain them; suitability is assessed by the Registrar. Issues for Determination:

8. (a) Was the Respondent entitled to revoke the licence under the Act ? (b) Was the decision reasonable and proportionate? (c) Were procedural fairness requirements met? (d) Does relevant case law support the Respondent’s approach? Findings:

9. The Appellant was convicted of driving with excess alcohol and disqualified for 12 months. He cannot lawfully give instruction during the disqualification period. The Respondent invited representations and considered them before making the decision. Analysis:

10. The drink-driving conviction is a serious offence directly relevant to the Appellant’s fitness to hold a licence intended for those training to become ADIs. Allowing retention of the licence during disqualification would undermine public confidence in the ADI register and send an inappropriate message to learner drivers. Relevant Case Law:

11. In Cracknell v Willis [1988] RTR 87, the High Court held that the Registrar must uphold high standards among driving instructors. Motoring offences, particularly those involving safety risks, are incompatible with the responsibilities of an instructor. This principle applies here: a drink-driving conviction demonstrates a lack of judgment and responsibility inconsistent with the role of an ADI. Conclusion:

12. The Respondent acted lawfully and reasonably. The decision to revoke the licence was proportionate and necessary to maintain public safety and confidence in the ADI register. Decision:

13. The appeal is Dismissed. The decision of the Registrar dated 24 April 2025 to revoke the Appellant’s trainee licence is Upheld

14. Right of Appeal: The Appellant may seek permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal on a point of law within 28 days of this decision. Judge Brian Kennedy KC 25 November 2025. Footnotes

1. Road Traffic Act 1988 , Section 123(1) : Restriction on giving paid instruction without registration or licence.

2. Road Traffic Act 1988 , Section 129 : Provision for trainee licences and Registrar’s discretion.

3. Cracknell v Willis [1988] RTR 87: High Court authority on maintaining high standards for driving instructors.