Question

NuKere, a nuclear plant, accidentally leaks hazardous waste onto a nearby property, despite having recently passed a rigorous set of safety checks. Under standards of strict liability, which of the following is true?
a) Nukere should be held liable because of the dangerous nature of hazardous waste. Regardless of safety checks, the accident happened.
b) NuKere can be held liable only if there is concrete physical evidence of harm to people or property.
c) Nukere cannot be held liable because anyone living nearby assumes the risk of hazardous waste toxicity.
d) NuKere cannot be held liable, as it just passed a strict set of safety checks.

Answer 1

Answer:

a.) Nukere should be held liable because of the dangerous nature of hazardous waste. Regardless of safety checks, the accident happened.

Explanation:

"Nuclear power plants" are known to be the most reliable source of electricity there is in the world. However, they pose some risks especially when it comes to the possibility of a nuclear accident happening.

When it comes to "nuclear third party liability," a strict liability of the nuclear operator means that the victim has no fault in any situation that might occur. This means that the operator is responsible or liable of the power plant's dangerous nature of hazardous wastes.

Whether or not they have recently passed safety checks, there is no need for them to prove anything on he is at fault. So, this makes Nukere liable for the situation.

This explains the answer.