Gray was unrepresented in the matter but has long insisted the two businesses operate legally, telling the Federal Court in his Australian Prudential Regulatory Authority (APRA) matter that “Creditnet … operates from a Sovereign Jurisdiction which is NOT under the control or jurisdiction of APRA”, according to the judgment handed down in the matter.

Court documents filed by the banking regulator in the case showed there had been recent inquiries regarding the bona fides of Creditnet Bank Internationale. It also revealed the regulator had been sending warning letters to the group and Gray since 2004 before it took court action in 2023.

APRA declined to say why it took 19 years to take court action against Gray and his entities. In a press release issued after it won orders against Gray, APRA deputy chair Margaret Cole said consumers needed to be vigilant and research unfamiliar businesses describing themselves as banks before depositing money.

“APRA protects bank depositors through its licensing regime, prudential framework and active supervision. We have taken action once again to prevent Australians mistakenly believing they are depositing money with an APRA-regulated entity and receiving the same protections,” Cole said.

A review of the group’s activities reveals it has been embroiled in issues facing other banks in Australia and overseas. Creditnet Bank Internationale caused an international stir in 2009 when its documents were used by an American man in an attempted €15 billion ($25 billion) fraud against the small Micronesian state of Palau.

Court documents filed by Palau in the US, seeking assistance from US authorities to gather evidence in the case, show that the man had come very close to pulling off this fraud attempt. Gray told this masthead that the financial instruments issued to the man were for funding commercial, humanitarian and infrastructure projects and were in good order.

Gray’s business has also had dealings with Garrett who is perhaps most widely known as the creator of popular summer sipper and 1990s favourite, the Andrew Garrett Sparkling Shiraz.

In 2006, Garrett attempted to launch separate takeover bids for Foster’s, Qantas, BHP and Suncorp using bills of exchange from CreditNet Bank International. Garrett sued Westpac in the Federal Court for failing to honour the documents that purported to provide him access to funds exceeding $US11.35 billion ($17.44 billion).

The court found Westpac acted appropriately when it refused to honour the documents after being unable to establish the bona fides of Creditnet Bank Internationale. The judgment in the matter shows Garrett had direct dealings with Gray to arrange his finance, including documents used by Garrett to launch his takeover offer of some of Australia’s biggest companies.

Gray told this masthead Creditnet Bank Internationale had lawfully issued the documents and that the court committed an error at law in the way that it came to its conclusion.

Regarding the APRA court case, Gray said he was unable to properly defend himself due to personal circumstances. He told this masthead: “Between the last two-way emailed letters of communications that Creditnet Bank Internationale had with APRA, and recent events taken place in the FEDERAL COURT, I was kidnapped and held for ransom.

“After paying the ransom funds I was released and ended up being hospitalised for an emergency operation. No documents were ever served on me to give me a chance to declare the ‘Truth’ of the Status of Creditnet Bank Internationale to the court.”

In the years after his use of Creditnet Bank Internationale, Garrett – who was in 2009 declared a vexatious litigant by the Federal Court and Supreme Court of South Australia over a separate legal matter involving National Australia Bank – branched out into sovereign citizen banking himself. In 2023, APRA secured Federal Court orders stopping Garrett using the term bank or claiming that three companies – Dynamic Capital Bank, Banque de Capital Dynamique and Banca di Como – were banks.

Loading

Justice Michael Lee’s judgment approving APRA’s stop order request provides insight into the ethos behind these types of banks. “As will already be evident, Mr Garrett’s claims are not legally compelling. Indeed, to borrow an expression from a case involving claims not dissimilar to those in the present case, they resemble a ‘jumble of gobbledygook’,” Lee said.

“This is self-evident and I do not propose to waste time dealing with the allegation I am a bankrupt, nor explain why I consider the better view is that I should not be imprisoned in Outer Mongolia or some such place.”

According to Lee’s judgment, Garrett also filed documents in that case that referred to the judge and APRA’s legal team as “prisoners” and drew up a table that assigned them prisoner numbers.

Garrett, who claims on his LinkedIn profile that he holds a variety of roles including Liquidator and Managing Controller of the World and the role of Crown Attorney General in Hong Kong since 2020, told this masthead: “The proceedings were commenced in a manner that was rushed and was not fair to the judge or me. At that time I was recovering from surgery and was incapable of making any submissions whatsoever and explained that to the judge.

“I have now filed and served a Notice of Removal to the High Court of Australia under s38(a) with a Judicial Officer nominated by the Chief Justice of the High Court of SAR Hong Kong,” he said.

Regarding his historic association with Gray, Garrett said: “Robert was always absolutely correct in his dealings. I have no reason to believe anything has changed.”

It doesn’t appear much will change for Gray and Garrett in terms of their dealings with regulators in Australia which maintain that these groups are not the types of banks Australians should give their money to.

The Business Briefing newsletter delivers major stories, exclusive coverage and expert opinion. Sign up to get it every weekday morning.