As climate change emerges as the defining crisis of the twenty-first century, legal strategies to hold governments and corporations accountable have gained momentum. Climate litigation has evolved into a crucial tool for compelling compliance with international agreements, particularly the Paris Agreement, by challenging the failure of states and private actors to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions. This chapter examines landmark cases such as Urgenda v. Netherlands and Milieudefensie v. Shell, which set legal precedents by compelling a state and a corporation, respectively, to take more aggressive climate action. However, climate litigation faces significant legal barriers, including issues of causality, justiciability, and the separation of powers. While civil liability has been the primary legal avenue, the possibility of incorporating criminal law remains contentious. Despite political rhetoric linking climate destruction to ecocide, current legal frameworks lack the necessary precision to prosecute such offenses as international crimes. As climate-related legal battles intensify, this chapter questions whether existing legal mechanisms are sufficient or if a fundamental restructuring of international law—including the criminalization of ecocide—is required to address the planetary crisis effectively.