Esse Test discusses the judicialisation of health from his myths and the need for reflections on law, economics and health to be made on the basis of reliable empirical evidence. Critical literature is problematic with the presentation of 10 myths: (1) the myth of excessive judicialisation of the right to health; (2) the myth of centrality of judicialisation for health management; (3) the myth of the spider resulting from the judicialisation of health; (4) the myth of the breach of the separation of powers; (5) the myth of the upper institutional capacity of the Government; (6) the myth of the deference as a mandatory leak; (7) the myth of the violation of federalism; (8) the myth of judges’ lack of concern about costs; (9) myth of the irrelevance of the discussion on costs; (10) the myth of justice of health as a universal panacea. Judges must protect the right to health, taking into account the practical consequences of decisions, both individually and collectively. The judiciary must reaffirm the guardian of the Constitution, with evidence-based action in the field of health justice.