Abstract: From the perspective of tort liability, climate change private interest litigation is difficult to meet the requirements of the concept of damage and causation. However, in extraterritorial judicial practice, the precedent of climate change private interest litigation has been accepted, and the case has made substantial progress. Behind this discrepancy between theory and practice is the reflection of the conflict between judicial modesty and social needs surrounding climate change. To balance judicial function and social effect, moderate judicial activism should be the path to pursue private interest litigation on climate change. Specifically, the climate change Damage Compensation Fund can be established as a consortium to split the long transmission chain from greenhouse gas emission behavior to the individual's disinterest into two segments, establish the obligation of greenhouse gas emitters to pay compensation to the fund through public law, and render climate change private interest litigation between individuals and the fund consortium legal person. In this way, the theoretical dilemma between the concept of damage and the concept of causation faced by private interest litigation on climate change can be resolved.