Perhaps we can stop bickering, children!
There are a number of reasons why such an appeal would fail (or, more probably, not be allowed to progress to the courts in the first place). A couple that immediately spring to mind:
Firstly the rights �to earn a living� or �to drive a motor vehicle� are not enshrined in the ECHR or the UK�s 1998 Human Rights Act. There are 18 �Articles� in the ECHR (upon which the UK�s Act is largely based). I cannot see how any of them � even using the widest of interpretations often favoured by Human Rights judges � can encompass either the right to earn a living, or to drive, or to a combination of both.
Secondly, the ECHR has, throughout its content, exceptions to the Rights provides by the various articles. In particular, many exceptions are provided to allow judicial punishments to be enforced. If such exceptions were not provided it would be impossible to impose a far greater restriction than a driving ban � that of imprisonment.
So whilst Article 5 says �Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person.�
It also says �No one shall be deprived of his liberty save in the following cases and in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law:
the lawful detention of a person after conviction by a competent court;
(it goes on to talk about further exceptions being provided for arrest and pre-trial detention).
So whilst it is often seen that the Human Rights Act is a panacea for criminals and wrong doers to avoid lawful punishment, it is not quite so simple as to quote ��Uman Rites� as soon as something occurs which one (not you, modeste as I know this is hypothetical) does not like.
Hopefully that answers the question without giving too much in the way of unwelcomed opinion!