在氣候變遷領域，法律開始發展多元規範結構，與司法訴訟的趨勢，法院因此被要求涉入高度政治性的案件，卻欠缺明確規範指引。法院究竟是要依循傳統法學理論，中立適用規範解決法律爭議，還是應該轉換其角色與論述方式，更能回應當前的需求，成為近年來法學的重要課題。透過政治脈絡與法院規範論理兩個軸線，本文分析歐洲法院的Case C-366/10判決，並且以全球行政法的視角檢視法院角色與論理。本案涉及歐盟2008年將民用航空的溫室氣體排放納入排放權交易系統的指令，背後多重政治角力透過規範衝突的形式呈現在法院面前。法院以詳盡而嚴謹的規範論述做出判決，卻未能平息各方爭議，反而導致歐盟宣布暫緩實施指令。本文認為，鑲嵌在全球行政法的結構中的氣候變遷規範競爭爭議，法院判決的正當性無法仰賴傳統的法院角色定位與規範論述。在全球行政法的結構中，法院成為政治行動者，追求其政治目標，卻同時必須注意到規範結構的變動與政治現實的平衡。法院必須穿梭在多元規範結構與多重政治角力之間，一方面要意識到全球規範結構的變遷，調整規範論述基礎，另方面必須注意到規範背後的制衡與政治平衡，才可能面對未來全球行政法的挑戰，發揮其適當功能。

Climate change has triggered the development of a multiple normative structure and climate change litigations. Courts around the world have to deal with cases with serious political confrontation in a multiple normative structure. Should the court objectively interpret the law and deal with only legal issue, or it should reconsider its role, discourse and strategies in the dynamic social context, is one important issue concerns legal scholars.With the lights shed from the theory of global administrative law, this article examines the political context and normative discourse of Case C-366/10 made by the European Court of Justice.The article argues that, the emergence of global administrative law has undermined the role of the court and the basis its decision relies on. In the structure of global administrative law, the court is a political actor who has political agenda and purses them through judgments and normative arguments. In order to deal with highly political issue in the structure of multiple normative structure, the court should develop judicial strategy in the between of norms and politics. The Court in C-366/10 fails to take the emergence of global administrative law seriously, thus fails to recognize its proper role and develop the best judicial strategies.