Abstract

This paper explores the limits that the duty to tell the truth has in respect of the arguments presented by attorneys before the courts of justice. After making some comments on language games that attorneys must play, it is suggested that their obligation to tell the truth is quite weaker than the obligation existing in other contexts in which claims are eminently theoretical. In this regard, although it is true that the obligation to tell the truth is somewhat forceful in regard to the production of primary facts, it is virtually non-existent in the construction of stories for the purpose of connecting them to the application of the rules of law.