Short answer. No. Although Article 658 makes the rules of co-ownership apply to a party wall, that reference only fills gaps the easement provisions leave open; it does not import the ordinary co-owner's right to demand partition. A party wall exists to support two buildings, and dividing it would defeat that purpose, so the Title's rules on party walls control instead.
What the law says
The easement of party wall shall be governed by the provisions of this Title, by the local ordinances and customs insofar as they do not conflict with the same, and by the rules of co-ownership.
Civil Code, Article 658 — What Governs the Party Wall. Read the full provision →
A three-layer hierarchy
Article 658 does not treat the party wall as pure co-ownership. It sets an order of priority: the specific provisions on party walls in this Title of the Civil Code apply first, local ordinances and customs apply next but only where they do not conflict with those provisions, and the general rules of co-ownership apply last, filling whatever gaps remain.
Why co-ownership is only a fallback
A party wall is, in substance, property held in common by two adjoining owners, which is why co-ownership rules make sense as a last resort. But the Title on easements already answers the questions that matter most for a party wall, such as who pays for repairs, how the cost of raising it is shared, and how a co-owner can be excused from paying by renouncing their share. Co-ownership rules only step in for what those specific articles leave unaddressed.
Why partition does not fit
Ordinary co-ownership lets any co-owner demand partition at any time under Article 494. A party wall cannot sensibly be divided that way, because it is a single structure supporting both buildings; physically splitting it would compromise the very support it provides. The specific rules on party walls, not the general partition right, govern how a co-owner exits that arrangement, mainly through renouncing the share and its upkeep obligations rather than tearing the wall apart. Attempting to force a physical division anyway would not simply fail; a court asked to order it would treat the demand as incompatible with the nature of the easement itself, since the wall's function as shared support for two structures cannot survive being split down the middle.
What local ordinances add
The reference to local ordinances and customs means a city or municipality can supplement the Civil Code's party wall rules with its own building and zoning requirements, so long as those local rules do not contradict the Title's own provisions on party walls. In practice this affects things like construction permits and setback requirements more than the underlying property relationship between the two owners.
Related provisions
- Civil Code, Article 658 — What Governs the Party Wall
- Civil Code, Article 494 — Right to Demand Partition
- Civil Code, Article 662 — Sharing the Cost of Upkeep