Sunday, 5th April 2026
Sunday, 5th April 2026

World

Singapore Shipping Firm Refuses to Pay $1 Billion in Sri Lankan Pollution Damages

Khabor Wala Desk

Published: 23rd September 2025, 8:49 AM

Singapore Shipping Firm Refuses to Pay $1 Billion in Sri Lankan Pollution Damages

A Singapore-based shipping company, X-Press Feeders, has informed AFP that it will refuse to pay US$1 billion in damages ordered by a Sri Lankan court for what has been described as the country’s worst environmental pollution incident.

 

In an exclusive interview, CEO Shmuel Yoskovitz explained that complying with the court ruling could have far-reaching consequences for global shipping and “set a dangerous precedent”.

“We are not paying because the whole base of maritime trade is based on the limitation of liability. This judgment undermines this limitation of liability,” Yoskovitz said.
“Any payment towards the judgment could set a dangerous precedent for how maritime incidents will be resolved in the future.”

He also noted that the absence of liability limits could lead to higher insurance premiums, which would ultimately be passed on to consumers.

The CEO reiterated the company’s regret over the incident, stating that X-Press Feeders had already spent US$170 million to remove the wreck, clean the seabed and beaches, and compensate affected fishermen.

“We are willing to pay more, but it has to be under certain marine conventions and an amount that is full and final,” he said. “But to live under this hanging guillotine — it is simply impossible to operate like this.”

 

The MV X-Press Pearl sank off Colombo Port in June 2021 after a fire, reportedly caused by a nitric acid leak, which raged for nearly two weeks. The ship’s cargo included:

Cargo Type Quantity/Description
Hazardous goods 81 containers including acids and lead ingots
Plastics Hundreds of tonnes of plastic pellets

 

Before reaching Sri Lankan waters, the ship was denied permission to offload the leaking nitric acid in Qatar and India.

The spill released tonnes of microplastic granules, affecting an 80-kilometre stretch of Sri Lanka’s western coast, with fishing prohibited for months.

 

In July 2025, Sri Lanka’s Supreme Court ordered X-Press Feeders to pay US$1 billion within a year, with an initial US$250 million tranche due immediately. The ruling also called for additional future payments as directed by the court.

Legal and Operational Challenges

  • X-Press Feeder’s liability has been limited by the London Admiralty Court to £19 million (US$25 million), but Sri Lanka has challenged this ruling.
  • The Sri Lankan government also filed a case in the Singapore International Commercial Court, currently stayed pending the outcome of the London case, with a pre-trial hearing scheduled for May 2026.
  • CEO Yoskovitz raised concerns regarding the ship’s Russian captain, Vitaly Tyutkalo, who has been barred from leaving Sri Lanka for over four years, and the company’s third-party agents in the country.

 

Experts warn that the incident’s effects will be long-lasting despite a major clean-up:

“If you visit the coastlines today, there is nothing visible in terms of plastic pollution. A major clean-up took place soon after the X-Press Pearl incident, but the effects of the pollution will be felt for a long time,” said Hemantha Withanage from the Centre for Environmental Justice.

The Sri Lankan Supreme Court has scheduled a hearing on Thursday to address the implementation of its ruling. The court has instructed police and the state prosecutor to initiate criminal proceedings for non-compliance if the parties are present in Sri Lanka.

Summary of Costs and Cleanup

Aspect Cost / Action
Wreck removal US$170 million spent
Seabed and beach cleanup Completed by company
Fishermen compensation Included in US$170 million
Legal liability in London £19 million / US$25 million
Court-ordered damages in Sri Lanka US$1 billion

X-Press Feeders maintains that any further payment should be final and under recognised marine conventions, warning that open-ended obligations would make continued operations unsustainable.

This case highlights the complexities of international maritime liability and the challenges in reconciling environmental damages with global shipping law.

Comments