The ruling deals with a claim of unconstitutionality against article 2267 (partial) of the Civil Code. The petitioner considers that the expression "servants" is contrary to articles 1 and 13 of the Political Constitution. The Court considered that the accused expression is certainly contrary to the Constitution and that its permanence in the legal system, having recognized the potential validating and transforming of legal language, is not constitutionally adapted with a view to protecting the dignity and non-discrimination of those who in the context of an employment relationship, as workers, they provide their services in exchange for remuneration. In order to avoid affecting the liability regime provided for in Article 2267 of the CC, on which the court did not rule on the merits, it was imposed, by virtue of the principle of conservation of the right, to declare the unconstitutionality of the term "servants" and arrange their substitution by terms that do not contain such a negative and unworthy burden, that is, by the expressions "workers" or "employees".