Since the adoption of Law 11.340/06, the debate on the consequences of the judicialisation of domestic conflicts has grown in the study of the social sciences and is no longer looking at those who are trying to understand how this law is implemented by the Brazilian judiciary. With the prospect of analysing the practices guided by the advent of the new law, this work seeks to understand the dynamics and dilemmas of the Juised of Domestic and Family Violence Against Women, taking into account their practices and procedures. The aim of the text is to understand how people perceive such practices and how they report on their experiences with judicial proceedings. This article looks at a single complex case, in which the parties divide the experience of dealing with three cases at the same time into different instances. Therefore, the purpose of the work is to present the various perceptions of justice that both women and men involved in the Maria Law on Pension can report after judicial experience. Abstract Since the new Brazilian law against domestic violence (Law 11.340/06), an increasing discussion on the nature and consequences of the judiciary of domestic conflicts is emerging in social sciences. Starting from the analysis of the practices guided by the new law, this work seeks to understand the dynamics and dilemmas of the newly created “Small claim courts for domestic violence against women”. Our goal is to understand how people PERCEIVE these practices and how do they report their experiences with the judicial procedure. The work analyses in details one single and complex case, in which three different judicial processes are intertwined. We have been able to demonstrate the different perceptions of justice both men and women report after having their case in court.