Key Facts
- •Clifford Craven appealed the decision to remove his name from the Register of Approved Driving Instructors (ADIs).
- •The removal was due to two motoring offences: driving without reasonable consideration for other road users and speeding on a motorway, resulting in six penalty points.
- •Craven argued mitigating circumstances (back pain) and disputed some statements made by his advocacy organization.
- •He had previously completed a Driving Awareness Course.
- •The Respondent considered Craven's behavior did not meet the standard expected of an ADI and that his actions could undermine public trust in the Register.
- •Craven admitted to speeding at over 90mph on a motorway.
Legal Principles
An ADI must be a 'fit and proper person' to remain on the register, considering their character, behaviour and standards of conduct.
Road Traffic Act 1988, sections 125(3) and 127(3)
Appeals are heard as re-hearings, with the Tribunal making a fresh decision, giving appropriate weight to the Respondent's decision.
Implicit in the appeal process description
Maintaining public confidence in the Register is crucial; allowing unfit individuals to remain would undermine this trust.
Harris v. Registrar of Approved Driving Instructors [2010] EWCA Civ 808
The Tribunal's powers allow them to make such order as they think fit, considering the decision afresh and giving appropriate weight to the Respondent’s decision.
Road Traffic Act 1988, section 131
Outcomes
Appeal dismissed.
The Tribunal found that Craven's actions, particularly the significant speeding offence, demonstrated a lack of care and responsibility inconsistent with being a fit and proper person to remain on the ADI register. The need to maintain public trust in the register outweighed Craven's individual interests.