In the contested first-instance decision in T 777/97, only two of the members of the division had signed the decision, one purporting to sign on behalf of the absent chairman. According to the board, decisions T 390/86 and T 243/87 (see point 4.5.2(a) above) were not directly applicable, because those two cases had been concerned with the decision making departments' composition during the oral proceedings at which they had announced their respective decisions, since the subsequent written decisions giving the reasons for those oral decisions had to be signed by the same department members. The case now in hand, by contrast, concerned a decision taken in a written procedure on the basis of the evidence on file. It went without saying that only those members who had taken the decision could decide on a request for its correction. The decision had to be considered open to appeal.