In a sensational move that sent shockwaves throughout the global shipping industry, Singapore-based X-Press Feeders has signalled its plans to appeal a Sri Lankan court ruling directing $1 billion in damages for the environmental catastrophe caused by the sinking of the MV X-Press Pearl in June 2021.
The Incident: A Maritime Nightmare
The Singapore-registered container vessel MV X-Press Pearl was travelling from India to the Middle East when it caught fire off the coast of Sri Lanka, off Colombo. Nitric acid leakage caused the fire to burn for almost two weeks before the vessel sank. The vessel carried 81 containers of dangerous goods, such as acids and lead ingots, in addition to hundreds of tonnes of plastic pellets.
The fire and sinking released hundreds of tonnes of microplastic beads into the sea along an 80-kilometre section of Sri Lanka’s west coast. The environmental impact was catastrophic, destroying marine life and local fisheries. A number of months saw a ban on fishing, leaving the once-teeming beaches covered in plastic waste.
Legal Fallout: Sri Lanka’s Supreme Court Decision
In July 2025, Sri Lanka’s Supreme Court held X-Press Feeders liable for the environmental contamination and directed the company to pay $1 billion in compensation as the initial payment, of which the first tranche of $250 million was payable by September 23. The court also stipulated that the company could make additional payments as required.
The judgement was welcomed by green activists as a key advance toward making companies legally accountable for their role in environmental disasters. But it has also fuelled a furious debate about its implications for global shipping and corporate responsibility.
The Company’s Response: A Refusal of Liability
X-Press Feeders, whose CEO is Shmuel Yoskovitz, has vehemently opposed the court’s decision. In an interview, Yoskovitz argued that adhering to the decision could potentially lead to widespread abuse by shipping companies. He laid stress on the fact that the cornerstone of international shipping is the limitation of liability, and the Sri Lankan court decision erodes this pillar.
“We are not paying because the entire basis of maritime trade is founded upon the limit of liability. This decision oversteps this limit of liability,” Mladen Yoskovitz warned. He also warned that any payment on the decision will set a noxious precedent for the resolution of maritime accidents in the future.
International Ramifications: A Sea Liability Precedent
The Sri Lankan X-Press Feeders case raises serious questions of corporate accountability and the limits of liability in international shipping. The consequences of the case have far-reaching potential to redefine the frontiers of corporate responsibility and maritime law.
Environmentalists argue that the regime does not go far enough in allowing business to wriggle out of blame by failing to require that it pay for accountable full-scale devastation of the environment, and its existence is worth little as compensation and a belated attempt at clean-up.Environmentalists are convinced that more stringent liability standards are essential to make corporations pay the full cost of their environmental impacts.
On the other hand, industry players warn that requiring unlimited liability could result in higher insurance premiums and operational risks, destabilising the global shipping industry.
Glimpses into the Future: A Watershed in Marine Law
As the court proceedings go on, the world waits with bated breath. The case has the potential to transform the laws of maritime liability and create new standards of environmental responsibility in shipping. The verdict can validate the current situation or open doors to the imposition of tighter laws to hold companies accountable for the part they play in inflicting damage to the environment.
In the months to come, Sri Lanka’s government and X-Press Feeders will be negotiating and litigating. The decision will undoubtedly have an impact on future maritime operations and environmental procedure globally, and this accident will be a benchmark moment in the continuing struggle to counter economic interests with conservation of the natural world.
