Professional Regulation Commission

SYSTEMS REQUIREMENTS SPECIFICATION DOCUMENT

Date: 14 December 2020

Name of System: Legal Management Information System (LMIS) Version: 02

Modules Requirements
LMIS 1. REQUEST FOR AUTHORITY TO ACCESS

This request is being made for Authority to Access the LMIS

to be granted to the Legal Appeals Unit (LAU) and the
Regional Offices (ROs) for the purpose of encoding and
updating their respective case dockets. The Professional
Regulatory Boards should likewise be granted limited access
to view the status of the cases in their respective dockets.
Currently, only the docket officers, hearing officers, HID
Chief and OLS OIC Director (OLS Central Office) have LMIS
accounts.

In the meantime, the docket officers of the OLS CO should be

allowed to access all fields (including appealed and regional
cases) for the purpose of encoding old cases until such time
that these fields shall be made accessible only to the LAU and
the ROs.

In relation to this, the authority to enter information on the

‘Nature of Charge/Offense’ must be limited to hearing
officers only. However, for old cases to be encoded, this field
should be accessible to the docket officers. Likewise, this
should only be made restricted to the docket officers but not
a “required” field, otherwise, they cannot proceed with the
encoding of the other details of the case.

2. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENT ON THE USER

INTERFACE

Under the current LMIS interface, the case details are found
in separate tabs (basic case details in tab #1, respondent’s
information in tab #2, and complainant’s information in tab
#3). It is recommended that these types of information be
consolidated and reflected only in one (1) tab for ease of use,
viewing, and reference.

ICT-21
Rev. 00
August 2, 2017
Page 1 of 4
 Professional Regulation Commission

SYSTEMS REQUIREMENTS SPECIFICATION DOCUMENT

Old professions should likewise be removed from the system,

such as the HPCL Patron, Major Patron, Aircon and
Refrigeration Specialist, among others.

Noted also are items with dropdown features, such as the

name of hearing officers, profession, nature of
charge/offense, and status of the case. Since these types of
information change regularly, the proposal is to have a
window for the docket officers and hearing officers to add or
modify information to these items.

There are also double entries that have been noted, however,
the docket officers are restricted from deleting these
duplicate entries.

In the Transaction Tab (creation of new case), the text box

for the name of respondent is limited in characters. There is
a need to make necessary adjustments to accommodate cases
with several respondents. The same is true with respect to
the text box dedicated to the name/s of the complainant.

The following are also suggested to be added under this tab:

(i) another text box for the profession; (ii) separate text
boxes for the information on the complainant and
respondent; (iii) nature of charge/offense; (iv) license
number; (v) history of handling hearing officers; (vi) history
of the respondent/s, in cases where previous decisions
involving the same respondent/s have been made.

As discussed during the last meeting, a ‘chat box’ should be

integrated in the Status tab (in the Case Card) to capture
specific developments in the case. Other OLS staff shall be
authorized to input case developments in this chat box (aside
from the docket officers and hearing officers).

A calibration of the “sleeping or resting time” of the program

may be considered. It has been observed that the program
switches to inactive mode after 3 minutes from actual use
(for security reasons). This could perhaps be extended to 10‫־‬
15 minutes.

ICT-21
Rev. 00
August 2, 2017
Page 2 of 4
 Professional Regulation Commission

SYSTEMS REQUIREMENTS SPECIFICATION DOCUMENT

3. GENERATION OF REPORTS

To be able to generate reports, there is a need to input the

dates of docket and filing of the case as well as the name of
the hearing officer to which the case is raffled or assigned.
Since the OLS is being requested to submit data on pending
cases in general (regardless of the dates covered, hearing
officer, or profession), a key or tool that automatically
generates this general information would be very useful and
convenient. This also applies to the general data being
requested that are profession‫־‬specific (e.g. # of pending
cases in medicine only)

4. DECENTRALIZATION OF DOCKETS

With the decentralization in the handling and hearing of

administrative cases to the regions, there ought to be
separate databases for regional cases in the LMIS. The ROs
shall be responsible in populating and updating their own
LMIS registry.

5. OTHER MATTERS

There may also be a need to clarify the icons in the LMIS

Dashboard (total regular administrative cases vs. total
number of unacted cases).

There are some items which, even if encoded, do not appear

in the information box (e.g. profession and license number in
the Respondent’s Information).

Prepared by: Ms. Czarmiah Altoveros

Mr. Glennford Pajaron
Mr. Mark Mas
(Docket Officers)

Reviewed and Approved by: Atty. Carla Angeline B. Ujano,

Hearing and Investigation Division

Atty. Lovelika T. Bautista

OIC-Director, Office of Legal Service
ICT-21
Rev. 00
August 2, 2017
Page 3 of 4
 Professional Regulation Commission

SYSTEMS REQUIREMENTS SPECIFICATION DOCUMENT

ICT-21
Rev. 00
August 2, 2017
Page 4 of 4