Are you sure?
Say you state on your website that X is a fraudster.
Then I report on my website that RIAD_BSC is claiming that X is a fraudster.
Logically, how can I be culpable? What I've reported is factual. I haven't commented on the accuracy of the allegation made by you. I've merely reported that an allegation has been made by you (which is the case).
You are culpable because you reported an untrue allegation. It doesn't matter that you are reporting what someone else has reported first. If you report an allegation, you must be able to stand it up. This is why, when the existence of a libel dispute is being reported, other newspapers very often don't report the actual details of the libel. They don't want to be sued for repeating it. The only time the whole libel can be reported in these cases is when it is aired in open court under privellege.
Also, Csirl, you are dead right when you say it isn't an automatic free pass. But it also doesn't matter whether or not you suspect what was said was true, or that the original reporter was telling the truth. All that matters is the pure fact that you repeated a libel, and nothing else.
There are only a few acceptable defences to libel
1 - Absolute truth (and then the onus is on you to prove that what you said was true)
2 - Fair comment (you have to prove that what you said was a reasonable thing to say - it can only be used for opinion pieces, where for example, you called someone a "fool" or something like that and they sued. Fair comment can't be used where the defamation was presented as a statement of fact in a news story)
3 - Privellege (i.e. Dail comments, open court comments, affidavits etc etc...)
You can't use "it wasn't me that said it first" as a defence, even if you are only saying "X has said Y about Z". If X libelled Z, then you libelled him too by reporting his libel. Otherwise Z's reputation would continue to get damaged by the story being repeated over and over by secondary publications, and Z would have no way of stopping it.