The appellant appealed an order striking portions of a defamation claim for failure to comply with the notice provisions of the Libel and Slander Act.
The court held that multiple newspaper articles cannot be treated as a single libel for notice purposes unless their defamatory meaning depends on other publications.
It further held that the candidate-for-public-office provision in s. 5(3) does not exempt a plaintiff from giving notice under s. 5(1), but only affects the retraction-related consequences in s. 5(2).
The appeal was dismissed and the motion judge’s order was upheld.
