Ryan Bridge says he has received invoices totalling £48,000 following Oxfordshire County Council’s High Court action over unauthorised flag displays. But what was the court case actually about, and has the amount been legally confirmed?
The founder of Raise the Colours, Ryan Bridge, says he has been sent legal invoices totalling £48,000 following a High Court case brought by Oxfordshire County Council over the unauthorised installation of national flags on public roads and street furniture. The claim emerged on 22 October 2026, but the publicly available July court order does not establish that Bridge has a final legal liability for that amount.
What is the £48,000 bill for?
Bridge, 45, from Bromsgrove in Worcestershire, was one of four named defendants in High Court proceedings brought by Oxfordshire County Council.
The case concerned the attachment of Union flags and St George’s Cross flags to lampposts, road signs and other public highway structures without permission.
In a social media video reported by the Oxford Mail, Bridge said he had received a series of invoices relating to the council’s legal expenses.
He described the charges as excessive, referring to payments requested for barristers and other legal work.
According to the newspaper’s report, Bridge said:
“They want £48,000 to pay for their legal fees.”
The figure comes from Bridge’s account of the invoices.
Fish 4 News has not independently verified the invoices or established that £48,000 is the final amount legally payable.
Why did Oxfordshire County Council go to court?
The legal dispute followed months of activity by Raise the Colours and associated campaigners.
Supporters describe the campaign as an expression of national pride, encouraging people to display British and English flags in public places.
However, Oxfordshire County Council said the repeated installation of flags on highway structures had created safety concerns and interfered with its responsibility to maintain public roads.
The council also reported incidents of confrontation, obstruction and alleged intimidation involving residents, staff and contractors removing unauthorised flags.
Those concerns formed part of the evidence presented in its civil proceedings.
The authority issued a formal legal notice in March 2026 and subsequently sent warning letters to named campaigners in May.
When the activity continued, the council applied to the High Court.
The council’s position was that it was seeking to prevent unauthorised activity and protect workers and residents, rather than stop people expressing national pride.
Council leader Tim Bearder said after the July High Court ruling:
“This is not, and never has been, about the flag.”
He pointed out that the council itself flies the Union Flag and St George’s flag.
The council’s full explanation and case documents are available on the Oxfordshire County Council website.
What did the High Court actually decide?
The case was heard on 23 June and 9 July 2026, with a written judgment issued on 31 July.
The proceedings named Ryan Bridge, Ben Cullen, Kevin Good and Trudy Wells, together with unidentified people involved in the prohibited activities.
Bridge, Cullen and Wells gave formal undertakings to the court on 23 June.
An undertaking is a legally binding promise to the court. Breaching one can carry serious consequences.
The final injunction issued on 9 July applied expressly to Kevin Good and defined categories of unidentified individuals.
It prohibited specified unauthorised activities, including attaching flags to highway structures, painting flags on roads, obstructing workers removing them, and harassing relevant council staff or contractors.
The restrictions are due to remain in force until 9 July 2027 unless changed or extended by the court.
Importantly, Bridge’s position under the proceedings involves his court undertaking, rather than being individually named in the operative prohibition of the final July injunction.
The sealed High Court order is publicly available.
Has a judge ordered Ryan Bridge to pay £48,000?
This is an important distinction.
The final High Court order dated 9 July contains the wording:
“Costs reserved.”
In simple terms, that means the order did not determine the legal costs at that stage.
A court may subsequently decide which parties should pay costs and how much is recoverable.
The amount a party claims in legal expenses is not necessarily the amount ultimately awarded or payable.
Consequently, three things must be distinguished:
- Reported invoices: Bridge says he has received demands totalling £48,000.
- Legal costs incurred: The council may seek to recover expenditure associated with bringing the proceedings.
- Final liability: The amount Bridge is legally required to pay depends on the applicable court decisions and costs process.
The July order alone does not establish a final £48,000 debt.
The council’s subsequent costs position, any later court order and the individual allocation of liability have not been independently confirmed.
Is it illegal to fly the English flag?
No. Flying the St George’s Cross or Union Flag is not, in itself, illegal.
The legal issue in this case concerns where flags were placed, whether permission was obtained and the conduct associated with installing or removing them.
For example, displaying a flag lawfully at a private home is fundamentally different from attaching one without permission to a public lamppost.
Highway authorities have legal responsibilities for the safety and maintenance of roads and associated infrastructure.
The court proceedings concerned unauthorised use of that infrastructure and related conduct, not a general prohibition on displaying English or British national flags.
Ryan Bridge also faces 14 criminal charges
Separate from the council’s civil legal action, Bridge has been charged with 14 criminal offences following a Thames Valley Police investigation.
Police announced the charges on 6 September 2026.
They include allegations involving threatening or abusive behaviour, racially aggravated public order offences and common assault.
The alleged incidents occurred between 31 January and 31 March 2026 in Oxfordshire.
Bridge is due to appear before Oxfordshire Magistrates’ Court on 3 November 2026.
These criminal proceedings are separate from the High Court injunction and the reported legal costs.
The charges are allegations. Bridge has not been convicted of these offences, and his guilt or innocence is a matter for the criminal court.
The details are published in the Thames Valley Police statement.
Another High Court hearing is approaching
Bridge is also involved in separate civil proceedings brought by Birmingham City Council.
Birmingham is seeking restrictions on unauthorised flag attachments to public infrastructure, along with other conduct connected to the installation and removal of flags.
Bridge has challenged that application, disputing allegations against him and arguing that parts of the proposed restrictions could interfere disproportionately with freedom of expression.
The next hearing is scheduled for Monday 2 November 2026, at Birmingham Civil and Family Justice Centre.
The outcome has not yet been determined.
These proceedings are separate from both the Oxfordshire case and the criminal charges.
What happens next?
The Oxfordshire case has already resulted in binding court restrictions and undertakings.
What remains unclear is the final position on the reported £48,000 legal bill.
Confirmation would require further evidence of the council’s costs claim, any subsequent costs orders and the sums actually payable by individual defendants.
The Birmingham hearing on 2 November and Bridge’s scheduled criminal court appearance on 3 November are two further developments to follow.
For now, the established position is straightforward: Bridge says he has received invoices totalling £48,000, the Oxfordshire High Court proceedings are documented, but the publicly available July order does not independently verify that he owes that precise sum.
Sources and further reading
- Oxfordshire County Council: High Court injunction and case documents
- High Court sealed order, 9 July 2026
- Courts and Tribunals Judiciary: Oxfordshire County Council v Ben Cullen and Others
- Thames Valley Police: Criminal charges announced on 6 September
- Express & Star: Birmingham High Court hearing scheduled for 2 November
- Oxford Mail, 22 October 2026: Raise the Colours leader sent £48,000 bill in court costs after injunction.
