Short answer. Not by himself. Article 691 says that to impose an easement on an undivided piece of land, the consent of all the co-owners is required. Consent given by only some is held in abeyance until the last co-owner agrees. But a co-owner who consents is himself bound not to prevent the exercise of the right he granted.
What the law says
In order to impose an easement on an undivided tenement, or piece of land, the consent of all the co-owners shall be required.
Civil Code, Article 691 — Consent Of All Co-Owners. Read the full provision →
What the law says
The consent given by some only, must be held in abeyance until the last one of all the co-owners shall have expressed his conformity.
Civil Code, Article 691 — Consent Of All Co-Owners. Read the full provision →
What the law says
the consent given by one of the co-owners separately from the others shall bind the grantor and his successors not to prevent the exercise of the right granted
Civil Code, Article 691 — Consent Of All Co-Owners. Read the full provision →
All co-owners must consent
Article 691 is clear that a single co-owner cannot burden the shared land on his own. It states: In order to impose an easement on an undivided tenement, or piece of land, the consent of all the co-owners shall be required. A right of way is an easement, and the land is undivided among all of you. So one co-owner acting alone cannot validly saddle the whole property with a permanent right of way binding everyone. An easement affects the entire tenement, not just one person's abstract share, which is why the law insists that every co-owner agree before it can be imposed.
Partial consent is held in abeyance
The article does not treat consent by some as an immediate half-measure. It provides that The consent given by some only, must be held in abeyance until the last one of all the co-owners shall have expressed his conformity. This means the easement does not take effect piecemeal. Even if most co-owners agree, the grant stays in suspense — neither fully alive nor withdrawn — waiting for the final holdout to consent. Only when the last co-owner adds his agreement does the easement become fully imposed on the property. Until then, the beneficiary cannot claim a completed right of way over the co-owned land.
But the consenting co-owner is bound
There is an important twist protecting the person to whom consent was given. The article adds that the consent given by one of the co-owners separately from the others shall bind the grantor and his successors not to prevent the exercise of the right granted. So while one co-owner's consent cannot by itself impose the easement on everyone, it is not meaningless. That co-owner — and those who take his place — cannot turn around and obstruct the very right he agreed to. His individual promise personally ties his hands, even though the full easement awaits the others' conformity. His successors inherit that same restraint.
What this means in practice
For someone seeking a right of way, the lesson is to obtain the agreement of every co-owner, not just a cooperative one. A deal struck with a single co-owner gives you a personal assurance that he will not block your passage, but it does not create a full easement enforceable against the whole property or the others. Conversely, a co-owner who wants to grant passage should understand that his lone consent binds him and his successors, even if it cannot commit the rest. The safe and complete route is unanimous consent from all who own the land in common.