In the article Causality and the fate of climate litigation: The role of the social superstructure narrative, we argue that an enhanced and wider understanding of attribution science will shape the social superstructure narrative of climate change. This social superstructure narrative influences courts in their decision-making. Benoit Mayer, in the same issue, has commented on our article. We use this rejoinder to clarify three elements of Mayer's comments in his response to help avoid any misconception of our argument or misunderstanding of the German Civil Code and thus hopefully enrich the discussion. These clarifications speak to the role of the courts first to preserve the rule of law and second in the context of climate change with the third clarification relating to the legal basis of a specific claim under German law.