In a defamation trial concerning an allegedly defamatory newspaper article also posted online, the plaintiff sought to introduce evidence of republication on third‑party websites based on Internet search results.
The court considered the rule that each republication of a libel is a separate publication and that the original publisher is not liable for subsequent republications unless an exception is pleaded, such as where repetition is the natural and probable consequence of the original publication.
The court reviewed authorities confirming that pleadings in defamation actions must specifically allege such exceptions.
Because the statement of claim did not plead the republication exception and no amendment had been sought despite notice from the defendants, the court held the plaintiff could not introduce evidence of republication by other Internet sites.
The evidentiary request was therefore refused.
