Short answer. Yes. Under Article 633 of the Civil Code, if the dominant estate belongs to several persons in common, the use of the easement by any one of them prevents prescription from running against the others. One co-owner's act of using the easement keeps the right alive for everyone.
What the law says
If the dominant estate belongs to several persons in common, the use of the easement by any one of them prevents prescription with respect to the others.
Civil Code, Article 633 — Use by One Co-Owner Preserves the Right. Read the full provision →
What Article 633 says
The Civil Code provides a clear rule for co-owned dominant estates: "If the dominant estate belongs to several persons in common, the use of the easement by any one of them prevents prescription with respect to the others." This means the easement is treated as a single indivisible right shared among all co-owners of the dominant estate. When one co-owner exercises that right, the law treats the act as sufficient to preserve the easement for the whole group.
Why co-ownership changes the prescription analysis
Prescription of an easement ordinarily occurs when the dominant estate owner stops using it for the period required by law. In a co-ownership situation, the law does not require every co-owner to separately exercise the easement to keep it alive. Because the easement belongs to the estate — not to any individual owner — the use by one co-owner is an exercise on behalf of the estate itself. Non-use by the other co-owners does not count against the easement while even one co-owner continues to use it.
Practical implications for co-owners of a dominant estate
If you and other family members or business partners co-own land that enjoys an easement — for example, a right of way over a neighboring lot — you do not all need to physically use the passage to prevent the easement from being extinguished by non-use. As long as at least one among you makes active use of the easement, all co-owners retain their right. This is particularly relevant when some co-owners live elsewhere or are abroad and cannot personally pass through the easement regularly.
What this rule does not cover
Article 633 addresses only the effect of use by one co-owner on prescription running against the others. It does not determine how co-owners should share or regulate use of the easement among themselves — those questions are governed by the general rules on co-ownership. Nor does the rule create or enlarge the easement beyond what was originally constituted. The protection against prescription applies only to the easement as it already exists; it does not revive an easement that has already been extinguished, nor does it prevent extinguishment on grounds other than non-use.
Cases citing this provision
These Supreme Court decisions cite the provision above. We list them so you can read them yourself; the summaries of what each decided are not ours to give.
- Republic of the Philippines vs. David Rey Guzman, etc., et al, G.R. No. 132964, February 18, 2000 — read the decision on LawPhil →