Although English courts have rarely addressed foreign law when determining whether to authorize e-mail service specifically, English judges have considered the potential offense to foreign law when determining whether other forms of substituted service are authorized.
Australia's recently amended Federal Rules of Court include explicit requirements of compliance with foreign law and prior traditional service attempts before a court can order substituted service on foreign defendants.
Australian judges may only order substituted service on a foreign defendant after receiving an official certificate or declaration from the court or government of the foreign country in which the defendant resides "stating that attempts to serve a document on a person in the foreign country, in accordance with a convention or through the diplomatic channel, have not been successful.
When considering whether to grant substituted service on defendants located in New Zealand by e-mail and in addition to serving one of defendant's counsel, the Federal Court of Australia in Queensland engaged in a due-process-like analysis of whether e-mail service would provide the defendant with actual notice.
Canadian judges also consider actual notice, previous attempts, and evasiveness of the defendant when determining whether substituted service, including e-mail service, should be authorized.