In T 37/97 a new representative had been appointed after the summons to oral proceedings had been duly issued. The board rejected the request for postponement and held that the new representative, before taking on the mandate, could be expected to have made sure he was available on the appointed date or to arrange for alternative representation. Furthermore, a professional representative could be expected to be able to prepare for oral proceedings with all due care within a month unless the case was exceptionally difficult, which it was not. See also J 4/03.