{{Short description|Carrying out a role on an interim basis}} {{About|the law of temporary officials|the law governing people acting on someone else's behalf|law of agency}} {{Use Oxford spelling|date = July 2020}}{{Use dmy dates|date=July 2020}} In law, a person is '''acting''' in a position if they are not serving in the position on a permanent basis. This may be the case if the position has not yet been formally created, the person is only occupying the position on an interim basis, the person does not have a [[Mandate (politics)|mandate]], or if the person meant to execute the role is incompetent or incapacitated.
== Business == Organizations are advised to have a [[Succession planning|succession plan]] including the designation of an acting CEO if the person in that job vacates that position before a replacement has been determined. For example, the lead director on the board of directors may be designated to assume the responsibilities of the CEO until the board finds a new CEO.<ref>Ann Brockett, Zabihollah Rezaee, ''Corporate Sustainability: Integrating Performance and Reporting'' (2012), p. 139.</ref>
== Politics == {{no sources|section|date=July 2024}} Examples of acting positions in politics include [[acting mayor]], [[acting governor]], [[acting president]], and [[acting prime minister]]. Officials in an acting position sometimes do not have the full powers of a properly appointed official, and are often the proper official's deputy or longest serving subordinate. Being placed in an acting position is a good indicator that the acting person has the confidence of their superiors or colleagues, and is likely to be chosen for the position on a permanent basis.
== Legal frameworks ==
=== Commonwealth === In [[Commonwealth realm|Commonwealth]] countries including Australia and Canada, the [[Carltona doctrine]] is the overarching legal principle governing when a [[Minister of the Crown|minister]] may be said to be acting for or on behalf of a government department.{{sfn|McMillan|2000|ps=: 'The prevailing presumption of Anglo-Australian public law, articulated in the Carltona case … was that: [t]he duties imposed upon ministers and the powers given to ministers are normally exercised under the authority of the ministers by responsible officials of the department'.}}{{sfn|Malkin|2008|pp=547–548}}
=== United States === The 1910 edition of ''[[Black's Law Dictionary]]'' defines "acting" as a "term employed to designate a ''[[:wikt:locum tenens|locum tenens]]'' who is performing the duties of an office to which he does not himself claim title".<ref>{{cite wikisource |plaintitle=[[Black's Law Dictionary]] |last=Black |first=Henry Campbell |authorlink=Henry Campbell Black |date=1910 |publisher=[[West (publisher)|West]] |location=Saint Paul, Minnesota |at=23 |scan=Page:Black's Law Dictionary (Second Edition).djvu/31 |quote=A term employed to designate a ''[[:wikt:locum tenens|locum tenens]]'' who is performing the duties of an office to which he does not himself claim title; ''e.g.'', "''Acting'' Supervising Architect." ''Fraser v. United States'', 16 Ct. Cl. 514. An acting executor is one who assumes to act as executor for a decedent, not being the executor legally appointed or the executor in fact. ''Morse v. Allen'', 99 Mich. 303, 58 N. W. 327. An acting trustee is one who takes upon himself to perform some or all of the trusts mentioned in a will. ''Sharp v. Sharp'', 2 Barn. & Ald. 415. }}</ref> The 1914 edition of ''[[Corpus Juris Secundum]]'' gives much the same account.<ref>{{cite book|title=[[Corpus Juris Secundum]]|date=1914|publisher=American Law Book Company|editor-last=Mack|editor-first=William|volume=1|location=New York|pages=913–914|chapter=Acting|editor2-last=Hale|editor2-first=William Benjamin|chapter-url=https://archive.org/details/corpusjurisbein03kisegoog/page/n949/mode/1up|via=[[Internet Archive]]}}</ref>
''Fraser v. United States'', the first case cited in the ''Black's'' entry on "acting", concerns [[James G. Hill]], the [[Supervising Architect of the Treasury]]. Hill had been suspended with pay while being investigated for a charge of fraud. Another person, [[John Fraser (architect)|John Fraser]], was then directed by the Secretary of the Treasury to take charge of and perform the duties of Hill's office as "Acting" Supervising Architect. Officially, Fraser was merely a contractor who had been contracted to oversee the construction of a building for the Bureau of Engraving and Printing. When Hill was returned to his position some five and a half months later, Fraser sought to be compensated for the time he had worked as Acting Supervising Architect, seeking the difference between the salary for that office and his much lower pay as a contracting architect for the Treasury. The Court of Claims found that the "acting" position was not a statutory creation, and that Fraser was entitled to no pay beyond that of his contract for the period.<ref>''Fraser v. United States'', 16 Ct. Cl. 507, 1800 [[Westlaw|WL]] 1254 (1880).</ref>
The rules for appointment of acting officials are covered in many cases by the [[Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998]] (FVRA).<ref>{{Cite web|last=Brannon|first=Valerie C.|date=2018-07-20|title=The Vacancies Act: A Legal Overview|url=https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44997.pdf|access-date=2018-11-08|website=[[U.S. Congressional Research Service]]|pages=9–13|archive-date=15 August 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210815043154/https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R44997.pdf|url-status=live}} {{PD-notice}}</ref> Legal scholar Anne Joseph O'Connell notes that one central—and unresolved—question about the nature of acting officials under FVRA is their status under the [[Appointments Clause]] of the [[Constitution of the United States]].{{Sfn|O'Connell|2020|p=660}} O'Connell observes that portions of FVRA, an act of Congress which sets out a detailed scheme for filling vacant positions in federal agencies, may be unconstitutional if acting officials can be "principal" officers under the Appointments Clause.{{Sfn|O'Connell|2020|p=660}} The constitutional issue emerges because the Appointments Clause requires principal officers to be appointed by the President with the [[advice and consent]] of the Senate. If acting officers who take office pursuant to FVRA—not pursuant to presidential nomination and Senate confirmation—can be considered principal officers, then the FVRA would be unconstitutional to the extent that it allows this to occur.{{Sfn|O'Connell|2020|p=662 (note 238)}} Heilpern, for his part, argues that acting [[Cabinet of the United States|Cabinet]]-level officials are principal officers.{{Sfn|Heilpern|2019|p=265|ps=: "… this article shows that under current Supreme Court case law, an interim Cabinet Head is clearly an 'Officer of the United States'".}}
=== South Korea === In South Korea, an acting officeholder is considered to be subject to the impeachment rules of the office they formally hold, not the office they act in. This principle was established as part of the [[Impeachment of Han Duck-soo]], who was prime minister and acting president; the South Korean National Assembly voted to impeach Han with 194 votes in favor, which meets the absolute majority requirement applicable for prime ministerial impeachments but not the two-thirds supermajority requirement applicable for presidential impeachments; the Constitutional Court ruled that the impeachment under the less restrictive rules is valid.
==See also== *[[Interim (disambiguation)]] *[[Regent]]
==References== {{reflist}}
== Sources == {{source-attribution | {{cite wikisource |plaintitle=[[Black's Law Dictionary]] |last=Black |first=Henry Campbell |authorlink=Henry Campbell Black |date=1910 |publisher=[[West (publisher)|West]] |location=Saint Paul, Minnesota |at=23 |scan=Page:Black's Law Dictionary (Second Edition).djvu/31 }} }} * {{Cite journal|last=Heilpern|first=James A.|date=2019|title=Acting Officers|url=http://georgemasonlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Heilpern_Final_Web2-1.pdf|journal=[[George Mason Law Review]]|volume=27|issue=1|pages=263–306|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200720201613/http://georgemasonlawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Heilpern_Final_Web2-1.pdf|archive-date=2020-07-20|url-status=dead}} * {{Cite journal|last=Malkin|first=Alissa|date=2008|title=Government Reorganization and the Transfer of Powers: Does Certainty Matter?|journal=[[Ottawa Law Review]]|language=en|volume=39|issue=3|pages=537–570|ssrn=2714178}} * {{Cite web|last=McMillan|first=John|date=2000-11-07|others=Research Paper 13 2000-01|title=Parliament and Administrative Law|url=https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp0001/01RP13|access-date=2020-07-22|publisher=[[Parliament of Australia]]|language=en-AU}} * {{Cite journal|last=O'Connell|first=Anne Joseph|date=2020|title=Actings|url=https://columbialawreview.org/content/actings/|journal=[[Columbia Law Review]]|volume=120|issue=3|pages=613–728|issn=0010-1958|jstor=26910475}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Acting (Law)}}
[[Category:Legal terminology]] [[Category:Temporary institutions]]