Public Purpose vs Private Profit: John Dutton and Eminent Domain

13 August 2026

The threats to the Dutton family in regard to losing their ranch are a reality for landholders not just in Yellowstone, but in real life.

Eminent Domain is a term that people are familiar with due to the show, but how would you feel if your home or your property was facing this same threat?

In Queensland, ‘compulsory acquisition’ or ‘resumption’ are the terms we use to describe the process whereby land can be taken for public purposes.

The principles of Eminent Domain are fairly similar around the world. Property may be taken by government for public purposes, and just compensation must be paid.

However, in 1999, the State Development and Public Works Organisation Act (Qld) 1971 was amended to go a step further. Since then, in certain circumstances, private corporations have been able to ask the State Government to take land for private profit rather than a public purpose.

If you own land and a private company wants to buy it from you to make a profit from a development, generally you can say “no” and you can negotiate with a private developer on a voluntary basis.

The result of this structure is that an owner of land can negotiate on a commercial or voluntary basis.

The situation usually results in a happy buyer and happy seller arrangement.

But what if a person does not want to sell?

Generally, people understand that if land is needed for a hospital or a road or a public purpose, there should be some kind of mechanism to allow the public to develop land.

However, how would you feel if a big company with big pockets turns up one day and decides they want your land?

You would at least expect a voluntary agreement should be worked through.

Unfortunately, large gas, mining, renewable, battery, transmission and manufacturing companies can apply to the State for a special declaration.

Once they have this declaration, they can apply and ask the State to take the land in a compulsory fashion.

This threat of compulsory acquisition is akin to holding a “stick” over a landholder in an otherwise voluntary negotiation process.