4

This paper describes different figures of misunderstandings and hypothetical imputations made by the actors of a judicial hearing (Belgian Justice of the Peace Court). In doing so, we aim to demonstrate that far from being obstacles that should be cleared up, the imputations of misunderstandings, errors and lies constitute primary discursive means which are continuously at work: here in conjugal dispute, judicial decisional process but also in any scientific effort of “ex situ” interpretation. Against the idea that law – in practice or in theory – is at odds with misunderstanding, we conceive the latter as being always a key interpretation for any persisting disagreement. Therefore, law and its application have to be thought as allowing the displacement, reconfiguration or postponement of misunderstandings rather than their avoidance or resolution.