The Supreme Court of Norway’s judgment joins a growing body of climate cases in Europe. However, in contrast to the judgments of the Dutch Supreme Court in the Urgenda case and the German Federal Constitutional Court the plaintiffs failed. The court based its dismissal both on its interpretation of the allegedly violated constitutional right to a healthy environment as well as on the separation of powers. The judgment shows similarities to the decision of the Swiss Federal Tribunal in the case of the “KlimaSeniorinnen”. In a Common European framework, the content of fundamental rights, the relationship between Parliament and Judiciary as well as the specific circumstances of the proceedings have proven to be crucial for climate cases. An upcoming decision of the ECtHR may stimulate the dialogue between Supreme Courts within Europe, as they have hardly referred to each other to date. However, even a ruling in favour of the plaintiffs by the ECtHR would not lead to a unification of climate policy within Europe, as it is a core element of democratic decision-making procedures.