This chapter debates whether litigation is a meaningful way to attack the problem of climate change mitigation. For the proponents of climate litigation, who side is taken by Cinnamon Piñon Carlarne, their action has the potential to ensure that states take more ambitious action than they would have taken otherwise. But the argument developed on this side is even stronger, namely that the courts have a positive duty to take decisions in support of mitigation of emissions. Guy Dwyer, for the sceptics, contends that litigation is the least promising way to go about addressing climate change mitigation because several unavoidable hurdles that face pro-climate litigants all but guarantee their defeat. Indeed, Dwyer argues, the number of cases that might have caused emissions to be reduced can be counted on half of one hand.