Given the impossibility of resolving the problem of climate change through consensus at the decision-making level, can climate litigation represent a viable legal alternative to effectively tackle global warming? Burgeoning scholarly work is advancing the role of climate litigation as a possible remedy to the inefficacy of climate decision-making. A comparison between core cases across select civil law and common law jurisdictions unveils a controversial trend not only with respect to climate judgments but also with specific regard to the subsequent enforcement phase, challenging the assumption that adjudication is the final legal solution to the problem of climate change.