2010 Annual Report

WHAT
MAKES US
DIFFERENT
ANNUAL REPORT
& ACCOUNTS 2010
BRITISH LAND MANAGES, OWNS,
FINANCES AND DEVELOPS PRIME
COMMERCIAL PROPERTY TO
ACHIEVE SUPERIOR LONG-TERM
GROWTH IN SHAREHOLDER VALUE.
WE AIM TO BE THE PARTNER OF
CHOICE AND TO CONSTANTLY SEEK
AND DELIVER OUTPERFORMANCE.
CONTENTS
DIRECTORS’ REPORT AND BUSINESS REVIEW
OUR BUSINESS PERFORMANCE REVIEW FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

01 Our performance 26 Financial performance 86 Consolidated income statement
02 Our business at a glance 36 Portfolio valuation 87 Consolidated balance sheet
06 What makes us different 38 Sector and asset allocation 88 Consolidated statement of
14 Chairman’s statement 40 Retail comprehensive income
48 Office 89 Consolidated statement of cash flows
STRATEGY IN ACTION 54 Development 90 Consolidated statement of changes
16 Chief Executive’s review 58 Joint ventures and funds in equity
21 Strategy and KPIs 60 Business sustainability 91 Notes to the accounts
22 Principal risks 64 Valuation report 118 Report of the Auditors
119 Table A – summary income statement
GOVERNANCE and balance sheet based on proportional
66 Board of Directors consolidation
68 Corporate governance 121 Company balance sheet
73 Remuneration report 127 Ten year record
85 Additional disclosures
OTHER INFORMATION
A copy of this report 128 Financial calendar
can also be found at 129 Shareholder information
www.britishland.com 130 Glossary of terms
Forward-looking statements
This report contains certain “forward-looking” statements reflecting current views on our markets, activities and prospects. By their nature, forward-looking statements involve
risk and uncertainty because they relate to future events and circumstances. Actual outcomes and results may differ materially from any outcomes or results expressed or implied
by such forward-looking statements. Any forward-looking statements made by or on behalf of British Land speak only as of the date they are made and no representation or warranty
is given in relation to them, including as to their completeness or accuracy or the basis on which they were prepared. British Land does not undertake to update forward-looking
statements to reflect any changes in British Land’s expectations with regard thereto or any changes in events, conditions or circumstances on which any such statement is based.
Our Business
OUR PERFORMANCE
Strategy in Action
STRONG VALUATION GOOD FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE
AND NAV GROWTH AND STRONG BALANCE SHEET
> Underlying PBT down 7% to £249 million: disposals less
+13.5% acquisitions reduced profits by £33 million

> Underlying diluted EPS down to 28.4p (2009: 41.0p) also reflecting
Portfolio valuation
impact of rights issue
Performance Review
> NAV per share up 27% to 504p
+33.5% > Dividend per share of 26p for the year: maintained dividend
Total return proposed for 2010/11
Change
+27%
Year end 31 March 2010 2009 (%)
Net asset value1 per share 504p 398p +27

IFRS net assets £4,208m £3,209m +31
NAV per share Underlying profit before tax £249m £268m -7
Governance
IFRS profit/(loss) before tax2 £1,128m £(3,928)m
Underlying diluted EPS 28.4p 41.0p -31
Basic EPS 133p (616)p
Dividends per share 26.0p 29.8p -13
1 EPRA (European Public Real Estate Association) basis.
2 See note 2 to the accounts.
TOTAL PORTFOLIO RETAIL OFFICE

Like-for-like rental Like-for-like rental Like-for-like rental
Financial Statements
income growth +1.4% income growth +2.1% income growth -0.4%
Occupancy 97% Occupancy 99% Occupancy 93%
REFOCUSING THE PORTFOLIO
> £1.1 billion sale of 50% of Broadgate into a JV with Blackstone

Other Information
> £247 million investment spend on selected retail and office assets
> Nearly £500 million committed to develop 1.2 million sq ft of
prime offices
> Further capacity to invest as the reshaping of the property
markets gathers momentum
DIRECTORS’ REPORT: Our Business The British Land Company PLC 01

OUR BUSINESS AT A GLANCE
Focus on prime property

British Land’s portfolio focuses primarily PRIME PROPERTY PORTFOLIO
on out-of-town retail properties and Central
London offices which offer attractive
2009 2010
risk-adjusted growth prospects. We have
also gained valuable expertise in the
residential and leisure sectors with
£8,625 1
£8,5391
million million
the increase in mixed use developments.
The portfolio includes directly held Retail Retail
properties as well as properties held
Office Office
Other Other
through investment funds and joint
ventures. We allocate our capital to enhance
long-term property returns, taking into 1 Including share of funds and joint ventures.
account our views of the market cycles.
> Focus on high-quality prime retail and London office assets

REIT > Best placed to capture customer demand and rental growth
A REIT, Real Estate Investment Trust, > Invest in property assets strategically and opportunistically
is a listed corporation or a trust that
uses the pooled capital of investors > Recycle capital to ensure optimal asset allocation
to purchase and manage property.
REITs are granted special tax status
which enables investors to invest Top 10 properties
in a broad range of property assets Contracted
Share Sq ft rent Occupancy
without being tax-disadvantaged. (including share of Joint Ventures and Funds) % ’000 £m pa rate %
In the UK, REITs must distribute 90%
01 Broadgate 50 4,400 184 96
of profits from property rental income.
02 Meadowhall Shopping Centre 50 1,400 78 98
British Land became a REIT in 2007. 03 Regent’s Place 100 1,210 42 84
04 Ropemaker Place 100 590 25 91
05 Fort Kinnaird Shopping Park 18 510 20 100
06 New Mersey Shopping Park 18 470 16 100
07 Glasgow Fort Shopping Park 36 390 16 97
08 Teesside Shopping Park 100 450 13 100
09 Bon Accord Shopping Centre 50 490 15 97
10 Parkgate Shopping Park 36 560 12 100
+13.5% 97% 12.6 years

Portfolio valuation Overall occupancy rate Average lease length to first break
02 The British Land Company PLC DIRECTORS’ REPORT: Our Business
Our Business
Strategy in Action
Enduring buildings
We invest in high quality buildings in prime PROPERTIES WITH ENDURING OCCUPIER APPEAL
locations and manage them to the highest
standards with a keen focus on customers’ Diversified occupier base Top 10 occupiers
needs. The names on our leases are some Share of rent
of the most successful businesses in %
Supermarket
the UK. Coming from a diverse range of Fashion and Footwear 01 Tesco 8
industries, these businesses spread our DIY and Bulky Goods 02 Sainsbury’s 7
risk and give us broad exposure to the Department Stores 03 Debenhams 4
Performance Review
market. The quality and diversity of our General Retail 04 UBS 4
occupiers are indicative of the enduring Travel and Leisure 05 HM Government 2
appeal of our buildings. Our business Bank 06 Homebase 2
thrives because our occupiers choose our Professional Services 07 B&Q 2
buildings due to their quality and location. Other Financial 08 The Royal Bank of Scotland 2
Other 09 Next 2
10 Macquarie Group 2
Top 10 occupiers in BL portfolio by BL share of rent
> High-quality customers
> Income diversity
Governance
High occupancy and rental growth
The success of a building is measured INCOME LONGEVITY AND SECURITY
above all by occupancy demand and its
occupier’s lasting commitment to it. We Annualised net rents
ensure this outcome by creating assets that £ millions
meet our occupiers’ needs and managing
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
those assets with experience and expertise.
Our occupiers are willing to sign long leases 500 98% of current rent
with us, affording us the security of strong still contracted in 2013
400
and sustainable rental income with only a
300
small portion of rent that is subject to break
or expiry in the next three years. 200
100
> High occupancy: portfolio 97% let

> Long leases: 12.6 years to first break; 13.9 years to expiry
Other Information
> 98% of current rent still contracted in three years’ time

OUR BUSINESS AT A GLANCE CONTINUED
Substantial financial resources

Our balance sheet is strong with substantial FINANCING AND PARTNERSHIPS
capacity to invest over the next 18 months.
Disposal of properties in the last few years
has reduced our loan to value ratio and
> Strong Group balance sheet
our average debt maturity is long, together > Substantial financial firepower to invest
giving us good scope for investment and
development.
We enhance our financial capability by Strong balance sheet and financial resources
joining forces with others, establishing Proportionally
funds and forming joint ventures with Group consolidated
partners who have complementary skills Net debt (£m) 1,550 4,210
and interests and can offer further, often Weighted average debt maturity (years) 12.4 11.1
off-market, opportunities. Weighted average interest rate (%) 5.3 5.2
Loan to value (%) 25 47
Interest cover (times) 2.3 2.0
Committed undrawn facilities (£m) 2,861 2,878
47% 11.1 years

Loan to value ratio Weighted average debt maturity
FLEXIBILITY AND CAPITAL EFFICIENCY

FROM PARTNERING
Funds Joint venture partners
HUT PREF TESCO SAINSBURY’S

Hercules Pillar Retail
Unit Trust Europark Fund
HIF BLACKSTONE LSP GREEN

Hercules PARK
Income Fund PROPERTY
TRUST
> Desirable properties

> Partners with complementary expertise and interests
> Performance and management fees
Our Business
Strategy in Action
Potential for development
We completed a number of our buildings DEVELOPMENTS
recently and successfully rented the
majority of the space. This is a testament
Key new office space
to our skills in the development process,
from planning and design to construction Completion Sq ft Let1
Use date ’000 %
management as well as our focus on
customer needs and our knowledge Ropemaker Place City May 09 594 91
of the real estate market. 10 Triton Street West End Sep 09 121 99
Performance Review
20 Triton Street West End Dec 09 255 39
The success of our prospective development
1 Based on ERV and includes office, retail and ancillary space.
projects depends on a combination of factors
such as the transport and infrastructure
offered by the location, the quality of
specification, configuration, flexibility
and sustainability of accommodation and
77% 2.7 million sq ft
timing of delivery into market demand. Of developments completed Committed developments
in the year already let
Governance
NEXT PHASE OF THE DEVELOPMENT CYCLE
> 1.2 million sq ft of committed office developments

> 1.4 million sq ft of committed retail developments
> Nearly 5 million sq ft of development prospects
Other Information

OUR
PORTFOLIO
GIVES US
SCALE
OUR £8.5 BILLION PORTFOLIO COMPRISES HIGH-QUALITY

BUILDINGS IN PRIME LOCATIONS MAINLY IN THE UK.
EACH WEEK OVER 20 MILLION PEOPLE VISIT OUR
PROPERTIES WHICH ARE HOME TO OVER 1,000
DIFFERENT ORGANISATIONS. WE HAVE THE FINANCIAL
AND OPERATIONAL CAPABILITY TO TAKE ON THE
BIGGEST CHALLENGES AND CREATE OPPORTUNITIES
THROUGH THIRD-PARTY PARTNERSHIPS.
The walkway between The Broadgate Tower and 201 Bishopsgate at Broadgate, London EC2. Our Business
Strategy in Action
Performance Review
Governance
Our Broadgate estate has both scale and The deal, completed in November 2009,
Comprising 16 buildings, presence and is valued at £2.5 billion also increased our financial firepower
Broadgate’s 4.4 million sq ft (Group share £1.2 billion). In September 2009, enabling us to take advantage of other
Other Information
of Grade A office, retail we announced a 50:50 joint venture with opportunities as they arise.
and leisure accommodation Blackstone which reduced our exposure
is visited by around 150,000 to a large single asset while partnering with
people every day. a company that shares our vision and plans
for this prime London office estate.

OUR
STRATEGY
GIVES US
FOCUS
WE FOCUS ON PRIME CENTRAL LONDON OFFICES

AND OUT-OF-TOWN AND WELL LOCATED RETAIL
PROPERTIES. WE ACTIVELY PURSUE OPPORTUNITIES
IN THESE MARKETS. WE WILL CONSIDER
OPPORTUNISTIC INVESTMENT OUTSIDE OUR CORE
AREAS WHERE WE SEE EXCEPTIONAL VALUE.
Glasgow Fort Shopping Park is perfectly positioned on a motorway junction between Glasgow Our Business
Strategy in Action
Performance Review
Governance
and Edinburgh. Over the last year we agreed 10 new lettings.
Our core focus is on the Retail and Office biased towards prime out-of-town locations
Glasgow Fort, at 390,000 sq ft, sectors and specifically on locations which where flexible formats can be adapted to suit
houses 67 high quality tenants we believe will deliver the best mix of income a wide range of trading formats.
Other Information
focused on fashion, health & and capital returns.

Our Office portfolio is focused on prime
beauty and food. It combines
Our Retail portfolio comprises 15 million sq ft assets in the City of London and West End
a high street environment with
of space (Group share) including 93 retail where, in the medium term, we believe
the convenience and flexibility
warehouse properties, 102 superstores and there will be improving occupier demand
of large out-of-town units.
10 shopping centres. The portfolio is heavily and limited supply.

OUR
PEOPLE
MAKE THE
DIFFERENCE
WE HAVE SIGNIFICANT EXPERIENCE AND

SPECIALIST EXPERTISE AND OUR PEOPLE ARE
LEADERS IN THEIR FIELDS. TOGETHER THEY
UNDERSTAND AND ANTICIPATE THE NEEDS OF
THE SECTORS IN WHICH WE OPERATE MAKING
BRITISH LAND A PARTNER OF CHOICE FOR
INVESTORS, ARCHITECTS, DEVELOPERS,
RETAILERS AND BUSINESSES.
Left to right: Darren Richards, Retail Investment, David Pollock, Project Management, Marion Dillon, Asset Our Business
Strategy in Action
Performance Review
Governance
Management and Ben Grose, Head of Retail Asset Management at Surrey Quays Shopping Centre.
We acquired a 50% interest in Surrey Quays Footfall on our retail parks increased by
Surrey Quays totals 309,000 Shopping Centre in South London and the 4.2% over the year and is a leading indicator
sq ft in 43 units and is anchored Clifton Moor Retail Park in York in December of a retail location’s success. Despite a difficult
Other Information
by a 115,000 sq ft Tesco Extra 2009 – our fifth joint venture with Tesco. These occupational market, there was a large
and a 53,000 sq ft BHS. It retail locations offer attractive opportunities volume of activity this year and our retail
provides strong proactive asset for our asset management expertise to add portfolio is now 99% let. Maintaining high
management opportunities. value over the short and medium term. occupancy in a weak occupational market
reflects the quality of our portfolio and our
significant asset management skills.

OUR
BUILDINGS
HAVE
ENDURING
APPEAL
WE HAVE A PORTFOLIO OF HIGH-QUALITY BUILDINGS
IN PRIME LOCATIONS WHICH SATISFY AND
ANTICIPATE THE NEEDS OF OUR OCCUPIERS
AND PROVIDE A SUSTAINABLE ENVIRONMENT
IN WHICH MODERN BUSINESSES CAN THRIVE.
OUR OCCUPANCY LEVELS ARE 97% VERSUS
THE INDUSTRY AVERAGE OF 92%.
Paul Burgess, British Land’s Head of London Leasing and Tony Scawthorn, Chief Operating Officer, Our Business
Strategy in Action
Performance Review
Governance
Liberum Capital on Liberum’s 12th floor terrace at Ropemaker Place, EC2.
Customer focus means we retain and attract Place houses. It offers some of the biggest
Ropemaker Place has been occupiers willing to commit to long leases for the floorplates in the City combined with great
certified BREEAM Excellent right building. Our average lease length is 12.6 efficiency and adaptability. Liberum Capital
Other Information
and is one of the first buildings years to first break, well ahead of IPD at 9.8 years. was the first company to take occupation in
in Europe to achieve pre- 2010. Their terrace shows the detailed façade
Completed in 2009, Ropemaker Place combines
certification for LEED Platinum. of the building, designed to reduce solar gain
stunning architecture, a robust specification
Around a third was pre-let and and reduce the load on the air-conditioning
and high levels of sustainability to meet the
over 90% has now been let in a by over 25% while still giving superb views
demanding business and corporate needs
challenging market – testimony over London. The terrace is seasonally planted
of City occupiers. Few buildings have the
to the building’s qualities. and ‘harvests’ rainwater for re-use.
resilience and scope to meet the requirements
of the range of occupiers that Ropemaker

CHAIRMAN’S STATEMENT
CHRIS GIBSON-SMITH
Our Business
AGAINST THE BACKDROP OF ECONOMIC
DOWNTURN, WE HAD A GOOD YEAR REFLECTING
THE HIGH QUALITY OF OUR PORTFOLIO AND OUR
CONSIDERABLE ASSET MANAGEMENT SKILLS.
Strategy in Action
In last year’s annual report I talked about the management skills. Our underlying profit We expect to deliver these high quality
global recession posing challenges to all before tax was £249 million, £19 million developments by 2013/14 to coincide with
businesses. It remained a central theme this lower than the previous year due primarily significant potential lease expiries in London
year with commentators still divided over the to disposals undertaken to rebalance offices at that time.
depth and duration of its impact. Businesses our portfolio.
The excellent operational performance in
have had to secure their positions while also
The challenges faced last year saw many the year is reflected in the performance of
building foundations for the future.
in our sector calling heavily upon asset our shares. In the twelve months to 31 March
British Land manages, owns, finances and management skills. We manage our portfolio 2010, British Land’s total shareholder return
Performance Review
develops prime commercial property to create to the highest standards and seek to ensure was 40%.
the best total returns for shareholders with our buildings have enduring appeal for our
The Board is proposing a fourth quarter
the aim of constantly seeking and delivering occupiers. Our occupancy levels are 97% across
dividend of 6.5 pence, bringing the total
outperformance. So our key actions have been our portfolio, ahead of last year, and our
dividend per share for the year to 26 pence.
to further strengthen our balance sheet and like-for-like rental income grew by 1.4%.
Our intention for next year is to maintain
rebalance our portfolio while also providing
In September, we announced the last major the level of 6.5 pence per quarter. We believe
renewed stability, focus and direction through
rearrangement of our portfolio with the sale this reflects our confidence in the future of
more active and intense asset management.
of 50% of our Broadgate estate to Blackstone. the Group.
In his first full year as CEO, Chris Grigg has This was a long-term strategic decision to
We further strengthened our Board this year.
done an excellent job, transforming the quality reduce exposure to a single asset and find
In the first two months, we welcomed Dido
and capability of the executive team and a partner who shared our vision and plans
Governance
Harding and Richard Pym as non-executive
sharpening the focus of our strategic intent for this prime London office estate. We intend
directors and Stephen Smith and Charles
and the performance and measurement of to now develop a new building on the site of
Maudsley as executive directors. We now
our delivery. British Land has scale, focus 4 and 6 Broadgate which will see UBS remain
have an exceptional array of talent and
and outstanding experience and expertise. as a key occupier on this prime 30 acre estate.
experience providing depth in property and
We have a long held and deep commitment The creation of the joint venture with Blackstone
range in business sector. Both Kate Swann,
to advancing the sustainability agenda in both increased our investment capability to take
a non-executive director, and Andrew Jones,
property development and management and maximum advantage of opportunities to grow
executive director, left during the year.
deliver some of the most sought after prime income and provide real growth in capital value.
We thank them for their contribution to
retail and office properties. This enables us
In the middle of the year we began to see a the Company.
to retain tenants, let new buildings with speed,
significant shift of investment back into the
and embrace new opportunities as we move I would like to thank again everyone at British
property market. Demand for properties has
through market cycles. Land for their support and commitment over
exceeded supply and quality assets at the right
the past year and to our many business
This reporting period was a tale of two price have been scarce. While we have been
partners who have contributed to our good
halves for the property industry. Like others prepared to be more opportunistic where
performance this year. We are in a firm
in our sector, we continued to suffer from exceptional value can be created, we have
position as we emerge from the challenges
a decline in asset value in the first half, but been patient, adding selectively to our portfolio
of last year and we look forward to the
we were among the first to report early and remaining true to our core sectors of
opportunities that lie ahead.
signs of recovery in property valuation when Retail and Offices.
we announced our third quarter results.
Development is beginning again to look
We reported a 13.5% increase for the year
attractive. We have progressed projects so we
as a whole, a significant achievement given
can hit the ground running and our acquisition
Other Information
the 2.4% first half decline.

of 2-14 Baker Street in April 2010 marked our
Against the backdrop of economic downturn, return to such activity. In addition to our plans Chris Gibson-Smith
we had a good year reflecting the high quality for Broadgate, we have also now committed to Chairman
of our portfolio and our considerable asset developing a further 500,000 sq ft at our 17 May 2010
Regent’s Place estate.

CHIEF EXECUTIVE’S REVIEW
CHRIS GRIGG
16 The British Land Company PLC DIRECTORS’ REPORT: Strategy in Action
Our Business
2009/10 WAS A GOOD YEAR FOR BRITISH LAND IN
A MARKET WHICH REMAINED CHALLENGING AND
VOLATILE FOR MUCH OF THE YEAR, REFLECTING
THE HIGH QUALITY OF OUR PORTFOLIO.
Strategy in Action
Overview of the year The income profile of our portfolio continued
“ We made further progress 2009/10 was a good year for British Land to be one of the strongest in the sector
during the year in a market which remained challenging and reflecting the quality of our assets and the
repositioning the business volatile for much of the year. This reflects the focus on providing buildings with enduring
to be able to deliver high quality of our portfolio, our considerable occupier appeal. Occupancy increased
asset management skills and the actions from 96% to 97%, an excellent result given
sustainable total returns
we have taken over the last two years. we completed nearly a million sq ft of new
for our shareholders
We made further progress during the year office developments during the period.
through a balanced mix repositioning the business to be able to deliver The average lease length was maintained
Performance Review
of dividends and capital sustainable total returns for our shareholders at 13 years to first break which compares
value growth.” through a balanced mix of dividends and with an average of 10 years for the market
Chris Grigg capital value growth. as a whole according to IPD.
Chief Executive Our portfolio performed strongly during the We completed 970,000 sq ft of new
year, a reflection of our greater weighting developments during the year at Ropemaker
in prime out-of-town retail and London office Place in the City and at Regent’s Place in the
See Chris Grigg talk about assets which generate strong and growing West End. 77% of the new office space was
British Land’s results for the income flows. The value of our portfolio let by the year end at rental values on average
year to 31 March 2010 at rose by 13.5% in the year. The portfolio 9% ahead of ERV with an average unexpired
www.britishland.com outperformed IPD by 4.3% on a comparable lease length of 16 years. This added £35 million
Governance
basis. While initial yield compression of 75bps of annualised contracted rental income.
drove the increase in value for the year as a Combined with other successful lettings,
whole, in the fourth quarter, new lettings were our office occupancy is now 93% and virtually
a significant factor. all of the available space is brand new.
Total
Year to March Retail Office portfolio
Occupancy rate 99% 93% 97%

< Average lease length to first break 13.9 yrs 9.6 yrs 12.6 yrs
Chris Grigg, CEO and Occupiers in administration 0.6% – 0.4%
Lucinda Bell, Director of % of rent subject to break/expiry over next 3 years 4.9% 10.2% 6.8%
Tax and Financial Planning.
Other Information
DIRECTORS’ REPORT: Strategy in Action The British Land Company PLC 17

CHIEF EXECUTIVE’S REVIEW CONTINUED
In Retail, we successfully retained the high As a result, we took the decision to commit
We continued to focus our occupancy levels in our portfolio with nearly £500 million to developing three office
portfolio on those sectors occupancy rising from 98% to 99%. On a schemes in Central London with an aggregate
and locations which we selective basis in the fourth quarter, we began floorspace of over 1.2 million sq ft.
believe will deliver the to see new lettings ahead of most recent > £232 million to complete our Regent’s
rental values with 37 long-term deals 7.1% Place estate with the construction of
best mix of income and
ahead of ERV. Our occupiers in administration a new mixed office and retail development
capital returns.
at 0.6% remains significantly below the with a combined floorspace of 500,000 sq ft
industry average. Of the 75 units affected including 120,000 sq ft of residential
by administration in 2009/10, 40 were re-let accommodation;
Our portfolio was valued at £8.5 billion by the year end. > £65 million to redevelop a new 139,000 sq ft
at the year end having risen by 13.5% office at 2-14 Baker Street, acquired just
We continued to focus our portfolio on those
in the year excluding the impact after the year end;
sectors and locations which we believe will
of disposals. We outperformed > £175 million (our 50% share) at Broadgate,
deliver the best mix of income and capital
the IPD capital return by 4.3% on to construct a 700,000 sq ft new building
returns. The most significant move during the
a comparable basis. for UBS on the site of 4 and 6 Broadgate.
year was the sale of a 50% stake in Broadgate.
We have agreed non-binding heads of
This further reduced our exposure to large
4.3%
terms with UBS for a pre-let on the entire
single asset classes and allows us to share
building and are in the process of
the refurbishment and redevelopment
negotiating a binding agreement.
projects at this major City estate with an
Outperformance vs. IPD capital experienced joint venture partner, Blackstone. We expect to complete the buildings during
return We also sold a further £246 million (British 2013 and 2014, when we expect market
Land share) of high street retail and other demand for Grade A London office space
assets which in our view are mature and/or to be strong and supply limited.
low growth.
During the year, we strengthened our
After a difficult first half, we began to see a management team at executive Board level
significant increase in investor demand for through the appointment of Stephen Smith
UK property assets, particularly prime. While as Chief Investment Officer and Charles
quality assets at the right price have been Maudsley as Head of Retail and Business
scarce, we started to invest selectively where Development. Both bring considerable
we believed we could add value either through property skills and expertise into the business.
asset management or development, investing
£247 million (British Land share) in core retail Results summary
and office properties. The most significant During 2008/09 and 2009/10, the Group made
of these were the purchases of a 50% share significant asset disposals with an aggregate
in Surrey Quays Shopping Centre in South value of £3 billion and in March 2009, we
London and 39 Victoria Street, SW1. After raised £740 million through a rights issue.
the year end, we acquired 2-14 Baker Street, These factors have had a significant impact
a development site in the heart of London’s on the results for the year to 31 March 2010.
West End for £29 million.
Our portfolio was valued at £8.5 billion at the
Toward the end of the year, strengthening 31 March 2010 balance sheet date, having
demand and asset prices in the Central risen by 13.5% in the year excluding the
London office market saw the economics impact of disposals. We outperformed the
of development improving significantly. IPD capital return by 4.3% on a comparable
Our Business
+13.4% +13.9%
Retail portfolio valuation Office portfolio valuation
£5.6 billion at year end £2.7 billion at year end
Strategy in Action
basis, reflecting our greater weighting in we remain alert to the possibility of further
In London offices, research shows prime retail and London office assets which market dislocation given the uncertain
there is likely to be an upturn in are underpinned by strong income flows. economic backdrop and the potential impact of
structural demand for Grade A The valuation of our retail portfolio rose by the fiscal actions needed to reduce the budget
space due to the high percentage of 13.4% to £5.6 billion and our office portfolio deficit in the UK. We will therefore continue
occupiers, especially in the City, who by 13.9% to £2.7 billion. Both our retail and to act with caution over the coming period.
have lease expiries around 2013/14. office portfolios outperformed IPD capital
Given the rapid rise in capital values in the
returns by 4.8% and 3.8%, respectively.
second half of 2009/10, we expect overall
93%
Performance Review
Net asset value (NAV) per share at 31 March 2010 real estate performance in 2011 to be
was 504 pence, an increase of 27% on the relatively muted. We believe that the market
prior year. This was significantly ahead of the will continue to polarise between prime
Occupancy rate in office 13.5% rise in our portfolio valuation reflecting and secondary assets both in terms of
the impact of gearing. Our proportionally the occupational and investment markets.
consolidated loan to value ratio was 47% Our expectation is that prime yields will
at the year end, compared with 57% at remain around current levels for the
In retail, we believe there will continue 31 March 2009. foreseeable future and in some areas, may
to be robust retailer demand for compress further, while secondary values
modern space in prime locations and Gross rental income for the year fell by
are more likely to drift downwards. Capital
we expect to see wide differences 14% from £650 million to £561 million on a
for the majority of developments is likely to
in performances between the best proportionally consolidated basis. Disposals
Governance
remain constrained.
locations and less well located net of acquisitions reduced gross rental
secondary assets. income by £102 million. On a like-for-like In London offices, research shows that there
basis, rental income rose by 1.4% for the year. is likely to be an upturn in structural demand
for Grade A space due to the high percentage
99%
Underlying pre-tax profits for the year were
of occupiers, especially in the City, who have
£249 million, a reduction of 7% on 2008/09.
lease expiries around 2013/14. At the same
Asset disposals reduced pre-tax profits by
time, Grade A supply is forecast to be limited
£33 million or 12%. On a statutory IFRS basis,
Occupancy rate in retail with relatively little new space expected to
reported pre-tax profits were £1.1 billion
be delivered to the market over the next four
compared with a loss of £3.9 billion in the prior
years. As a result, rental values, which started
year, reflecting the impact of revaluations.
to rise in the fourth quarter of the last financial
Underlying earnings per share fell to year, are expected to continue to rise over the
28.4 pence from 41.0 pence, principally next year. We expect our portfolio, which is
reflecting the dilutive impact of the March focused on modern Grade A space, to perform
2009 rights issue. The Board is proposing a well in this environment.
dividend for the fourth quarter of 6.5 pence
In retail, we believe there will continue to
bringing the total for the year to 26.0 pence
be robust retailer demand for modern space
per share.
in prime locations, and we expect to see wide
differences in performances between the
Market and Group outlook
best locations and less well located secondary
We have entered the new financial year
assets. There is a real risk of further rental
with greater optimism and are particularly
Other Information
deflation in 2010/11. However, we feel well

encouraged by the recent strengthening of
placed with our high quality portfolio which
the London office occupier market. However,
is focused on those sectors of the retail
the economic recovery remains fragile and
industry which are expected to remain
unemployment continues to rise. In addition,
relatively resilient.

CHIEF EXECUTIVE’S REVIEW CONTINUED
We expect to become more active in of organic growth in our existing portfolio

The economics of development investment markets in 2010/11 as the and income from both our newly activated
have become significantly more reshaping of the real estate landscape development programme and acquisitions.
favourable over the past year, gathers momentum. We do not expect We have a strong balance sheet and are
particularly in Central London offices. to make any major asset allocation shifts. well placed to benefit from the ongoing
However, we will continue to accumulate restructuring of the UK property market
1.3 million sq ft
assets in our core office and retail sectors over the coming years.
with a view to deploying our expertise to
In view of our confidence in the business
re-engineer near prime and secondary
going forward, the Board is recommending
assets to create the prime of tomorrow.
New office development (including that the dividend for 2010/2011 is maintained
120,000 sq ft residential space) The economics of development have become at 26.0 pence per share.
significantly more favourable over the past
year, particularly in Central London offices
where we expect the development of over
We have a strong balance 1.3 million sq ft of new space at Regent’s
sheet and are well placed Place, Broadgate and Baker Street to enable
to benefit from the ongoing us to create prime space at attractive prices.
restructuring of the UK In addition, we are considering restarting the
property market over the development of our 610,000 sq ft Leadenhall
coming years. building in the City and are exploring
interest from potential partners. In retail,
we have 750,000 sq ft of consented space for
development on our existing retail parks and
are currently considering activating a number
of the schemes in the coming year.
In Europe, we continue to monitor real estate

markets and the performance of local
economies. New initiatives are likely to be
focused on out-of-town and big box retail
investment in markets where we have local
knowledge and locally based expertise.
Summary
British Land’s objective is to deliver superior
and sustainable value through a balanced
mix of dividend distribution and capital value
growth. Over the last two years, the Group
has been significantly reshaped. The actions
we took further strengthened our business
and put us in a stronger position. Our portfolio
is weighted toward those sectors and
locations which are predicted to outperform
the market over the next five years. We have
a secure, high quality income stream which
is expected to benefit from a combination
Our Business
STRATEGY AND KPIs
Strategy in Action
Strategy Excellence in asset management will continue Optimal financial structure to drive
At British Land, our objective is to be the to be a key driver, enabling us to deliver capital total returns
premier UK commercial real estate company, growth through maintaining or increasing high We aim to minimise the cost of capital and
delivering superior sustainable total returns levels of occupancy, driving above average drive total returns through an optimal mix
from its portfolio through a balance of income rental growth and improving existing assets of debt and equity finance, maintaining our
and capital growth. As a REIT, our intention through repositioning. loan to value ratio over a whole property cycle.
is to distribute a significant proportion of
We will look to create prime assets through Our debt will be financed from a variety
our current net income to shareholders in
investment or development, principally in our of sources with a spread of maturities,
dividend form.
Performance Review
core office and retail sectors, but also where including longer-term financing supported
Our ability to achieve these goals will be we see significant short-term value creation by committed income under long leases.
determined by: opportunities through leveraging our core At the same time, we will maintain significant
> the quality of our existing portfolio and the property expertise. committed undrawn loan facilities, to support
income streams it produces; current and future business requirements and
We will have a disciplined approach to capital
> our asset selection and asset management take advantage of opportunities as they arise.
recycling, disposing assets which are mature
skills ensuring we are focused on the
or low growth to reinvest in assets with better
highest returning sectors and assets;
return prospects.
> our financial structure and access to
capital to invest in the business; and
> the quality of our people and our ability
Performance indicators
Governance
to run our business sustainably.
Year ended 31 March British Land IPD
High quality income stream to support High quality income stream

strong dividend Occupancy rate1 96% 92%
Our portfolio will continue to focus on prime Average lease length to first break 12.6 yrs 9.8 yrs
assets which deliver high quality, secure and Rent subject to break/expiry over next 3 years 7% 21%
growing income streams, underpinned by Like-for-like rental income growth 1.4% -0.6%
high quality occupiers with strong covenants. Like-for-like rental value growth -6.2% -5.5%
Total property return 21.5% 17.4%
We will invest disproportionately in
sectors and locations which will benefit 2010 2009
from secular trends in occupier demand –
Capital value growth and total returns
principally in retail and London offices –
Portfolio valuation growth 13.5% -28.2%
and on modern, well designed and invested
Net asset value2 per share growth 27% -64%
buildings which have low involuntary Total return 33.5% -61.6%
capital spend requirements.
Strong balance sheet and financing capability
Optimal asset allocation to deliver future Loan to value ratio 47% 57%
Average debt maturity 11.1 yrs 12.7 yrs
capital value growth
We will capture future capital value growth
through a combination of driving our existing Sustainability
assets and investing in high quality assets Customer satisfaction survey3 82% 73%
through purchases or development. Our asset Resource efficiency-improvement in energy usage 12% -10%
Other Information
selection will be consistent with our view that 1 Excluding accommodation subject to asset management and under offer (to be comparable to IPD).
modern, well invested, well located assets, 2 EPRA basis.
3 Surveys conducted in 2007 and 2009.
which meet occupiers’ changing needs, Data for Group and its share of joint ventures and funds.
will deliver superior capital value growth.

PRINCIPAL RISKS
Approach to risk management Risk process

Risk management is integral to the way British Land undertakes a comprehensive
we run our business from setting strategy, formal risk appraisal on a semi-annual basis
through to formulation of objectives, with the Board and other key executives which
consideration of transactions, day-to-day identifies the principal risks that affect the
decision making and performance of core Group. To enable focus on key risks, a simple
business procedures. British Land’s and conventional method of prioritisation
small head office team and relatively flat is undertaken. Risks are scored and ranked
management structure allows the executive based on the likelihood of occurrence and
directors to have close involvement in the potential impact on the Group.
operational matters of the Group, and identify
The resulting risk matrix and risk log are
and respond to risks promptly.
reviewed by the Executive Committee of
Our approach seeks to understand, limit the Board. The adequacy of risk mitigating
and manage adverse impacts arising from strategies and controls are considered at
external and internal financial, property each review. This helps to assist in defining
and operational events whatever their cause. the risk profile of the business and ensures
It is inherent in the nature of risk that risk that the implications are understood.
brings reward, and there are risks that The principal risks are also considered
we will choose, with our expertise, to accept by the Audit Committee and the Board.
and others that cannot be fully mitigated
The responsibility for the management
at an acceptable cost.
of each risk is clearly allocated to specific
The principal risks are shown in the table members of the Executive Committee.
on the opposite page.
Key risk indicators are being defined and
allocated to each risk. In most cases the
property and financing indicators have been
used within the business for many years.
The risk processes described above are

regularly benchmarked against best practice.
The Audit Committee specifically reviews
and considers the risk management
processes annually.
Our Business
Strategy in Action
PRINCIPAL PROPERTY RISKS
Risk description Impact areas Key mitigants
Property investment Net Asset Value. Defined investment strategy.

Failure to execute property Total property return. Defined asset appraisal process.
investment and development
Investment Committee reviews all opportunities against
strategies which are value
predetermined criteria.
enhancing.
Monitoring of macro-economic and property market trends.
Performance Review
Investor market Net Asset Value. Prime portfolio.
Decrease in demand by Active Asset Management.
investors for real estate.
Office occupier market Rental income and cash flow. Long upward only lease profiles.
Weakened occupier demand Reduced strength of tenant covenant High occupancy and low near term expiries.
for office developments and increased arrears/bad debts. Quality assets easier to re-let.
and potential vacancies
Cost of tenant incentives for new lettings.
due to financial market
Governance
rationalisation and economic Empty unit (void) costs.
uncertainty. Net Asset Value.
Retail occupier market Rental income and cash flow. Diversified tenant base.
Reduced retail occupier Empty unit (void) costs. Long leases and strong covenants which are reviewed on letting.
demand for space, increased
Net Asset Value. Prime portfolio easier to re-let.
supply, tenant defaults.
Close occupier relationships assists in understanding changing
requirements.
Review of consumer trends.
Tenants at risk monitored regularly.
Other Information

PRINCIPAL RISKS CONTINUED
PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL RISKS

Financing availability Unable to fund property investments Spread of sources and maturities of facilities.
Shortage of financing or development programme. Sufficient lines maintained for spending commitments with
or refinancing Increased cost of finance including undrawn significant committed but undrawn facilities.
at acceptable cost. bank facilities. Continuing and extensive capital market and bank relationship
management.
Financing cost Increased cost of borrowing and hedging. Interest hedging policy.
Adverse interest Ability to refinance. Hedging effectiveness regularly monitored.
rate movements.
Credit risk Loss of deposits. Summary of exposures by bank and credit ratings reported monthly.
Financial counterparty Favourable BL positions are forcibly closed. Spread of sources and maturity of facilities.
credit risk.
Cost of re-arranging facilities. Cash placed across a range of deposit accounts.
Incremental changes in financing rate. Credit worthiness of derivative counterparties assessed.
Taxation Increased direct tax costs and compliance costs. Dialogue with government on industry issues.
Increased tax rates Property performance. Structured planning.
or tax scope.
Our Business
Strategy in Action
PRINCIPAL OPERATIONAL RISKS
Taxation compliance Taxation penalties. Detailed understanding of REIT legislation.

Internal action or inaction Compliance modelling and forecasting.
leads to non-compliance with
Strong relationship with HMRC.
Real Estate Investment Trust
(REIT) taxation regime. Advisors used on transactions and for compliance.
Performance Review
People Lost business relationships. Employment packages in line with FTSE 100 companies.
Key staff departures Loss of management direction, poor or delayed Simple, consistent and known procedures allow operations to continue.
or change. decision making. Succession planning regularly evaluated with non-reliance on single
Reputational damage with stakeholders. individuals.
Supply chain Cost overruns. Close supply chain relationships facilitate assessment and monitoring.
Development contractor Programme delays leading to potential loss Major or leading contractors engaged only.
solvency and availability. of tenant revenue. Assessment of contractor prior to appointment, including a financial
Governance
covenant review before the contract is agreed.
Health and Safety Criminal prosecution of responsible executives. Health and Safety policy.
Occupational and Reputational damage. Specialised professional advice.
Construction
Fines and legal costs. Extensive compliance reporting.
Health and Safety or
Environmental breach. Site risk assessments and audit visits.
Environmental resources Exposure to resource-related taxation New developments, significant acquisitions and office refurbishments
Environmentally and penalties, and reputational damage. follow a Sustainability Brief.
unsustainable or undesirable Increased occupational costs and reduced Occupier programmes for sustainability and minimising
buildings are held in our property values. environmental impact.
portfolio with potential
Impact of floods, low air quality and extreme Internationally recognised Environmental Management System
impacts of inefficient use
temperatures. for sustainable developments.
of natural resources or
failure to adapt to expected Assessment of resource risks during development and management.
climatic influences.
Ethics Reputational damage. Segregation of duties and dual payment authorities.

Fraud and misstatement. Financial loss. System access controls for accounting and cash.
Other Information
Vetting of new staff background and employment history.

Annual external and internal auditing of key controls and testing
of expenditure and accounting transactions.
Insurance.
Culture of review and challenge.

FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE
GRAHAM ROBERTS
“ The Group’s underlying

profits and cash flows
during the financial year
reflect the completion
of our re-balancing of
the property portfolio
through disposals.”
Graham Roberts
Finance Director
26 The British Land Company PLC DIRECTORS’ REPORT: Performance Review
Our Business
£545 million +27%
Net rental income NAV per share
Proportionally consolidated EPRA basis
Strategy in Action
Introduction Income statement
The results for the financial The results for the financial year saw an The Group’s gross rental income for the
year saw an overall overall recovery in investment property year ended 31 March 2010 at £342 million
recovery in investment values, with the pace of valuation decline has reduced by 31% compared to last year,
property values, with the slowing markedly in the first quarter and due to the property disposals that the Group
then reversing significantly in the next three has undertaken over the last two years.
pace of valuation decline
quarters giving a total valuation increase Proportionally consolidated gross rental
slowing markedly in the
of 13.5% for the year ended 31 March 2010. income reduced by 14% to £561 million, with
first quarter and then the retained portfolio generating £14 million of
Performance Review
reversing significantly in The Group’s underlying profits and cash flows
additional income from rent reviews and new
the next three quarters. during the financial year reflect the completion
lettings, whereas lease determinations and
of our re-balancing of the property portfolio
expiries reduced rental income by £7 million.
through disposals.
For properties held at 31 March 2010, the
The Group’s total return for the The Group’s total return for the year was
annualised gross rental income (including the
year was 33.5% driven by the 33.5% (compared with a negative 61.6% in
spreading of tenant incentives and guaranteed
recovery in property values in the previous year), driven by the recovery
rent increases) for the portfolio is £524 million
the last nine months. in property values in the last nine months.
per annum on a proportionally consolidated
Proportionally consolidated income statements basis, comprising £254 million per annum for
33.5%
and balance sheets are included in Table A Group properties and £270 million per annum
Governance
to the financial statements which show British for British Land’s share of properties held in
Land’s interests in funds and joint ventures funds and joint ventures.
on a ‘look-through’ basis. The following
Total return Like-for-like income growth for the financial
commentary refers to the financial information
-61.6% in 2008/09 year was up 1.4% overall compared with the
of the Group as reported under IFRS where
year ended March 2009. Retail increased 2.1%
the after tax results of funds and joint ventures
driven by retail warehouses and superstores.
are shown as a single line on the income
Office like-for-like income growth was flat,
statement and the net investment in funds
where a 1.2% decline in the City was offset
and joint ventures is shown as a single line on
by an increase of 2.1% in the West End.
the balance sheet, unless stated otherwise.
Summary income statement
Year to 31 March 2010 Year to 31 March 2009
Group Funds & JVs Prop Consol Group Funds & JVs Prop Consol
£m £m £m £m £m £m
Gross rental income 342 219 561 497 153 650

Property outgoings (5) (11) (16) (44) (8) (52)
Net rental income 337 208 545 453 145 598
Other income 13 2 15 18 2 20
Funds and joint ventures
Other Information
underlying profit 81 55
Administrative expenses (55) (10) (65) (51) (7) (58)
Net financing costs (127) (119) (246) (207) (85) (292)
Funds and joint ventures
underlying profit 81 55
Underlying profit before tax 249 249 268 268
DIRECTORS’ REPORT: Performance Review The British Land Company PLC 27

FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE CONTINUED
Gross rental income1

Like-for-like income growth for the
Year to Year to
financial year was up 1.4% overall 31 March 31 March
2010 2009 Movement
compared with the year ended £m £m %
March 2009.
Retail2 275 270 2.1%
Office2 110 111 (0.4)%
+2.1%
Other 5 4 2.6%
Retail Total – like-for-like2

Acquisitions
390
22
385
4
1.4%
Driven by retail warehouses Disposals 63 183

and superstores Developments 19 11
Fixed and minimum uplifts3 63 63
Other4 4 4
Office -0.4% Total
1 With proportional consolidation.

561 650 (13.7)%
2 Investment properties subject to open market reviews and owned throughout the current and comparative periods.
Decline in the City offset by 3 Rental income from fixed and minimum guaranteed rent reviews is recognised on a straight line basis.
an increase in the West End 4 Includes surrender premiums, asset management determinations, back rents and other accounting adjustments.
The movement in property outgoings Funds and joint venture underlying profits
Net financing costs for year-on-year has been impacted by the for the financial year were £81 million, an
the financial year were accrual of a credit risk provision against increase of £26 million on the year to March
£127 million, a reduction income recognised on leases with contract 2009. The increase reflects the establishment
of £80 million on the prior fixed uplifts of £17 million in the prior year, of the Meadowhall joint venture in February
year due to the lower level of which £16 million has been released 2009 and the Broadgate joint venture in
of Group debt following this year due to the improvement of credit November 2009. On an IFRS basis (being
the March 2009 rights conditions compared to last year. the net profit including property revaluation
issue and property movements and taxation) the reported results
Property outgoings as a percentage of gross
disposals in the past for funds and joint ventures were a profit
rental income after removing the impact
of £479 million, which compares to a loss
two years. of the credit risk provision were 6.1%
of £767 million in the year to March 2009, the
(2009: 5.4%) for the Group or 5.7% (2009: 5.4%)
main driver of the movement in year-on-year
on a proportionally consolidated basis.
profit is the recovery in valuation of properties
The movement in the outgoings percentage
and investments.
year-on-year is due to an increase in void
costs on vacant buildings, principally the Group administrative expenses for the
Ropemaker Place and Triton Street financial year at £55 million increased by
developments that were not fully pre-let £4 million on the prior year, which included
on completion. Lettings achieved in the a release of £7 million of accruals for share
fourth quarter and post year end have based incentives following the non-vesting
significantly reduced the Group’s exposure of share incentives granted over the past
to void properties. three years.
Fees and other income at £13 million were Net financing costs for the financial year
reduced from £18 million in the prior year, were £127 million, a reduction of £80 million
due to the lower valuation of properties in on the prior year. This reduction is due to
the funds on which the management fees the lower level of Group debt following the
are based and reduced performance fees. March 2009 right issue and property disposals
in the past two years.
Our Business
£249 million 28.4 pence
Underlying pre-tax profits Underlying earnings per share
Dividend per share 26.0 pence
Strategy in Action
Net financing costs on a proportionally tax exposures. This compares to a credit of fourth quarter dividend for the March 2009
consolidated basis were £246 million, a £47 million in the prior year, resulting mainly financial year. The scrip and cash elements
reduction of £46 million on the year to March from deferred tax movements. of dividends declared and paid in the year
2009. The differential between the Group and are summarised in the table below.
proportionally consolidated financing costs Earnings per share
We are obliged to pay out 90% of our REIT
reductions reflects the increased proportion Underlying earnings per share were 28.4 pence
profits. While REIT profits are volatile due
of joint ventures in the Group results following compared to 41.0 pence in the prior year, due
to tax rules, this is usually a timing difference
the establishment of the Meadowhall and to the movement in underlying profit
and so, in view of the stability of our underlying
Broadgate joint ventures. discussed above as well as the impact of the
Performance Review
business, we aim to provide a consistent
March 2009 Rights Issue.
As a result, underlying pre-tax profits were predictable approach to dividends. We do not
£249 million for the financial year, reduced intend to pay out capital profits nor income
Dividends
by £19 million on the prior year. The principal generated from other sources.
The Group pays quarterly dividends, which
drivers of this movement are set out below:
mirrors the rental cash inflows. The proposed Our aim is to grow dividends in line with
dividend for the fourth quarter is 6.5 pence underlying rental income growth. In a
Movement in underlying pre-tax profit
per share, totalling £57 million. This will period of economic recession over-renting
£m be paid on 13 August 2010 to shareholders may delay rental income growth. In recent
Year ended 31 March 2009 268 on the register at the close of business on times, our property decisions, notably the
Credit risk provision 17 9 July 2010. This dividend will be entirely disposals of 50% stakes in Meadowhall
Share incentive write back (7) a ‘normal’ dividend i.e. not a PID (Property and Broadgate, have led us to reduce the
Governance
Income Distribution). balance sheet and thereby our rental income
Year ended 31 March 2009
(adjusted) 278 stream and dividend cover. Dividend cover
An enhanced scrip alternative with a 5%
Disposals less acquisitions for the year to 31 March 2010 was 1.08 times
bonus (above the equivalent cash value)
(of which Broadgate £12m (2009: 1.38 times).
is being offered to shareholders with the
and Meadowhall £8m) (33)
fourth quarter dividend. Shareholders will We expect to be net investors looking forward
Rent reviews, new lettings
be able to choose between cash or shares. and the combination of rental growth from
and renewals 14
Lease determinations and expiries (7) existing assets, new lettings and acquisitions
The enhanced scrip alternative has been
Developments (22) are expected to increase our dividend cover.
offered with all quarterly dividends since the
Impact of rights issue proceeds 8
Current year release of
credit risk provision 16
Dividends
Management and performance fees (5)
Cash Scrip Total Total pence
Year ended 31 March 2010 249 £m £m £m per share
Payment month
The revaluation increase of £496 million is November 2009 1st interim 35 21 56 6.50
the most significant item in the Group’s IFRS February 2010 2nd interim 37 19 56 6.50
income statement for the current financial May 2010 3rd interim 32 24 56 6.50
year. This compares to a valuation reduction August 2010 4th interim – – 57 6.50
of £3,241 million in the prior financial year. Declared for year to March 2010 – – 225 26.0
The current year revaluation gain has resulted
Other Information
in the IFRS profit on ordinary activities before November 2008 1st interim 48 48 7.77*
taxation amounting to £1,128 million which February 2009 2nd interim 47 47 7.76*
compares to a loss of £3,928 million last year. May 2009 3rd interim 48 48 7.77*
August 2009 4th interim 32 23 55 6.50
Taxation recognised in the income statement
amounted to a credit of £12 million, principally Declared for year to March 2009 175 23 198 29.80
due to the favourable settlement of prior year *Restated for the March 2009 Rights Issue adjustment factor – actual dividend paid was 9.375 pence per share

Balance sheet
Our net investment in The Group and proportionally consolidated balance sheets, IFRS net assets and EPRA net
funds and joint ventures assets are summarised in the table below:
was £1,594 million, up
from £952 million at the Summary balance sheet
previous year end. The As at 31 March 2010 As at 31 March 2009
movement is principally Group Funds & JVs Prop Consol Group Funds & JVs Prop Consol
due to the establishment £m £m £m £m £m £m
of the Broadgate joint Properties at valuation 4,152 4,387 8,539 5,810 2,815 8,625
venture in November 2009. Investment in funds and
joint ventures 1,594 (1,594) 952 (952)
Other non-current assets 271 (105) 166 63 63
6,017 2,688 8,705 6,825 1,863 8,688
The EPRA net assets have
Other net current liabilities (189) (24) (213) (308) 2 (306)
increased in the current financial Net debt (1,550) (2,660) (4,210) (3,242) (1,863) (5,105)
year to £4.4 billion from £3.4 billion Other non-current liabilities (70) (4) (74) (66) (2) (68)
as at 31 March 2009.
IFRS net assets 4,208 4,208 3,209 3,209
EPRA adjustments 199 199 178 178
504 pence EPRA net assets
EPRA NAV per share

4,407
504p
4,407
504p
3,387
398p
3,387
398p
NAV per share For an explanation of EPRA adjustments, see Note 2.

2008/09: 398 pence per share
At the year end, the Group had 51% of the The EPRA net assets have increased in
property portfolio and 63% of net debt held the current financial year to £4.4 billion
off the Group’s balance sheet in funds and (504 pence per share) as at 31 March 2010
joint ventures. The IFRS balance sheet shows from £3.4 billion (398 pence per share)
our investment in funds and joint ventures as at 31 March 2009. The principal drivers
grouped together and shown net. On this for this increase are as follows:
basis, our net investment at 31 March 2010
was £1,594 million, up from £952 million at Movement in EPRA net assets
the previous year end. The movement is Pence
principally due to the establishment of the £m per share
Broadgate joint venture in November 2009 At 31 March 2009 3,387 398
as well as the recovery in property values Property and investment
in the second half of the financial year. revaluation (including
disposals) 908 104
Underlying profit
after taxation 244 28
Cash dividends (152) (17)
Scrip dividends (7)
Other share issues 31 (1)
Other (11) (1)
At 31 March 2010 4,407 504
Our Business
12.6 years 97% 35%
Average lease length to first break Overall occupancy rate Rental income attributable
to top 10 occupiers
Strategy in Action
Movement in net debt and cash flows These disclosure changes are due to the > 98% are subject to upward only reviews;
The Group net debt was reduced by 52% Group now only having joint control of these > included in these, 78% have open market
during the financial year to £1,550 million. entities after the disposal of 50% to our joint rent reviews, usually every five years
The drivers for this movement can be venture partners, therefore these groups (with reviews across the portfolio well
summarised as follows: are accounted for under the equity method. spread over the next five year period);
> 20% are subject to RPI-linked (subject to
Movement in IFRS net debt Accounting judgements a floor of zero), fixed or minimum uplifts;
£m
In preparing these financial statements, > £61 million further income is contracted to
the key accounting judgements relate to the be added to the rent roll over the next five
Performance Review
At 31 March 2009 3,242 carrying value of properties and investments, years due to the expiry of current rent-free
Net cash flow from operating activities (136)
which are stated at market value. The Group periods and minimum rental increases
Property and investment sale proceeds (323)
uses external professional valuers to becoming effective under existing leases;
Property and investment purchases
determine the relevant amounts. > 1.5% of rents are from short-term leases;
and capital expenditure 373
Dividends paid1 154 > less than 0.5% are reliant on the occupiers’
The primary source of evidence for
Other cash flow movements 11 turnover; and
property valuations should be recent,
Net debt transferred on establishment > over 97% of the March 2010 quarter
comparable market transactions on
of Broadgate joint venture (1,751) rents were collected within 10 working
arm’s‑length terms. However, the valuation
Fair value movements of debt days of the due date, in line with our
of the Group’s property portfolio is inherently
and derivatives (20) previous record.
subjective, as it is made on the basis of
Governance
At 31 March 2010 1,550 assumptions which may not prove to be A wide spread of good tenant covenants
1 Includes £2 million of withholding tax that relates accurate, particularly in a period where also contributes to the security of our income.
to prior year dividends, in addition to £152 million there are fewer comparable transactions. No single entity accounts for more than 8%
of current year cash dividends.
of the total rents. The top 10 office tenants
Financial strength include major international banks, law firms
Impact of Meadowhall and Broadgate Two significant factors contribute jointly to and HM Government, accounting for 17%
joint ventures British Land’s financial strength: security of the rent roll. Top 10 retail tenants include
Since February 2009, the Company has sold of cash flows from our assets and our the largest food, fashion and homeware
a 50% interest in two major asset groups – financing structure. retailers and department stores and provide
Meadowhall and Broadgate – into joint 29% of rents.
ventures. Both of these disposals were Our prime property assets generate
corporate transactions where the securitised secure long-term contracted rental income. Occupancy remains high across all sectors,
debt as well as the investment properties of The weighted average lease length is 97% overall. The development programme
these ventures were sold into the joint ventures. 12.6 years (14.0 years to expiry). If no other always creates additional space by its very
management action is taken, and if all tenants nature, but we are confident that we can
These transactions significantly impacted with a break clause in their leases choose continue to rent the new space out successfully.
the presentation of the Group’s IFRS financial to exercise them, after three years to
statements: March 2013, 93% of our current rents will
> In the income statement, the gross and continue to be contracted (98% including
net rental income, the net financing costs fixed/minimum uplifts).
as well as the net valuation movement
of these ventures post completion are This reliable cash flow is enhanced by
now shown net in the single ‘funds and lease terms which contractually provide
Other Information
joint ventures’ line. for growth in income at regular rent

> In the balance sheet, the investment reviews. The following features of our
properties, net working capital balances UK rent roll including our share of funds
and net debt of these ventures are now and joint ventures is evidence of the security
shown net in the ‘investment in funds of our rental cash flows:
and joint ventures’ line.

Financing policy and practice Liability management is not a profit centre –

Across the property cycle the Board The principal objectives under this policy are to: no speculative transactions are undertaken.
considers the Loan to Value ratio > minimise the cost of capital through a mix The Group’s debt and derivative positions
should not exceed a maximum of 55%. of debt and equity finance; are continually reviewed to meet current
At 31 March 2010 the proportionally and expected debt requirements.
consolidated Loan to Value was 47%. > raise debt from a variety of sources and
maintain a spread of maturities, including The Group maintains a balance between
longer-term financing supported by longer-term and shorter-term financings.
47% committed income under long leases;
> maintain significant committed undrawn

loan facilities, to support current and future
Short-term financing is principally raised
through bilateral and syndicated revolving
bank facilities. Medium to longer-term
Loan to value ratio financing comprises public and private bond
business requirements; and
On a proportionally consolidated basis issues, including private placements and
> actively manage financial risks, including securitisations. Financing risk is spread by
interest rate, foreign exchange, liquidity using a variety of types of debt. The maturity
and counterparty risks. profile is managed by spreading the
repayment dates and extending facilities.
Profit and loss account and balance sheet
management Interest rate management
The Group monitors its current and projected The Board sets an appropriate maximum
financial position using several key internally level of sensitivity of underlying earnings
generated reports: cash flow, borrowing, and cash flows to movements in market rates
debt maturity and interest rate exposure. of interest over a rolling three to five-year
The Group also undertakes sensitivity period. The proportion of fixed rate debt
analysis to assess the impact of proposed required to remain within the target sensitivity
transactions, movements in interest rates varies with the levels of gearing and interest
and changes in property values on the key cover. With financing raised at both fixed and
balance sheet, liquidity and profitability ratios. variable rates, derivatives (primarily interest
rate swaps) are used to achieve the desired
Debt finance gearing is used to enhance
interest rate profile across proportionally
returns. The Loan to Value ratio on a
consolidated net debt. Currently 80-90%
proportionally consolidated basis (including
of projected debt is at fixed rate over the policy
our share of Joint Ventures and Funds) is
time period. The use of derivatives is managed
the primary measure of gearing monitored
by the Derivatives Committee. The Group’s
by the Board. The level of gearing is adjusted
exposure to derivative counterparties is
over time to reflect judgements about
monitored on a regular basis, as are their
the position of the property market and our
external credit ratings.
portfolio in the cycle, the relative vulnerability
to market corrections of our assets, particularly
Liquidity and cash management
regarding the level of speculative development,
The Group maintains undrawn committed
and relevant general economic indicators.
revolving bank facilities to provide financial
Across the property cycle the Board
liquidity. These can be drawn/repaid at short
considers the Loan to Value ratio should not
notice, reducing the need to hold liquid
exceed a maximum of 55%. At 31 March 2010
resources in cash and deposits. This
the proportionally consolidated Loan to Value
minimises costs arising from the difference
was 47%.
between borrowing and deposit rates, while
Our Business
£4,210 million 2.0x
Net debt Interest cover
Including share of funds and JVs Including share of funds and JVs
Strategy in Action
reducing credit exposure. Deposits are Financing statistics
placed as necessary to optimise the rate Year End 31 March 2010 2009
of return, subject to the credit standing
of the counterparty. Group:
Net debt £1,550m £3,242m
In January 2010, the Group purchased Weighted average debt maturity 12.4 yrs 15.1 yrs
£200 million of medium-term notes. Weighted average interest rate 5.28% 5.33%
These tradable notes have a fixed interest % of debt at fixed/capped interest rates 80% 100%
rate of 4.4% per annum and a maturity date Interest cover1 2.3x 2.0x
Performance Review
of January 2015. Loan to value2 25% 46%
Undrawn committed facilities £2,861m £2,950m
Foreign currency management
The Group’s policy is to have no material Group and share of funds and joint ventures:
unhedged net assets or liabilities denominated Net debt3 £4,210m £5,105m
in foreign currencies. The currency risk Weighted average debt maturity 11.1 yrs 12.7 yrs
on overseas investments is hedged via Weighted average interest rate 5.18% 5.27%
Interest cover1 2.0x 1.9x
foreign currency denominated borrowings
Loan to value2 47% 57%
and derivatives.
1 Underlying profit before interest and tax/net interest.
When attractive terms are available to do so, 2 Debt/property and investments.
the Group borrows in freely available currencies 3 EPRA net debt £4,081 million (2009: £4,941 million), see table A.
Governance
other than Sterling. The Group fully hedges
its foreign currency risk on such borrowings.
secured against a single combined pool of operational support, and are committed for
assets with common covenants: the value of terms up to five years. Undrawn loan facilities
Financing structure
those assets is required to cover the amount are maintained to support current and future
As set out under its financing policy, the Group
of these debentures by a minimum of 1.5 times business requirements.
utilises debt raised from a variety of sources,
and net rental income must cover the interest
with a spread of maturities to mitigate These credit facilities are based on relationships
at least 1 times. We use our rights under
refinancing risk. At 31 March 2010 Group with a wide range of banks, reducing reliance
the debentures to withdraw, substitute or add
gross borrowings were £1,781 million; on any particular lender. At 31 March 2010,
properties (or cash collateral) in the security
including our share of debt in Funds and 29 different financial institutions from
pool, in order to manage these cover ratios
Joint Ventures, gross borrowings were 12 countries provided finance to the Group
effectively, deal with any asset sales and
£4,669 million. via bilateral or syndicated facilities. Current
remedy if necessary. Secured debt issued
facilities amount to some £3 billion at floating
The types of debt employed are: by the Group as part of the acquisition in 2006
interest rates based on LIBOR plus an average
of the BL Davidson former joint venture
i) with recourse to British Land for repayment margin of 47bps per annum (arranged during
also includes asset value and income ratios,
and being either additionally secured by 2004-7, when we concentrated on achieving
similarly managed by us and remediable
specific assets or unsecured; and the longest available term at the then market
as necessary.
rates). These lines are now mostly undrawn,
ii) non-recourse to British Land and in
The assets of the Group not subject to any following repayments from the proceeds of
“ring-fenced” structures, including
security stood at some £2.4 billion as at sales and of the Rights Issue.
Funds and Joint Ventures.
31 March 2010.
The maturities of the Group bank facilities
Facilities with recourse to British Land
Other Information
Unsecured bank revolving credit facilities are such that some £1 billion expire within
Secured debt at fixed interest rates with
raised by British Land provide full flexibility the next two years (including a £790 million
long maturities and no amortisation is
of drawing and repayment at short notice bank syndicate) and some £1.9 billion
provided by debentures. The £1 billion
without additional cost, providing valuable has a maturity of more than three years.
of Debentures issued by British Land are

The Group’s refinancing requirements will be Although secured assets and other assets
considered in the light of investment decisions. of non-recourse companies are excluded
from Unencumbered Assets for the covenant
Other unsecured funding includes US private
calculations, unsecured lenders benefit from
placements, issued in full at fixed rates,
the surplus value of these assets above the
requiring no amortisation and with terms
related debt and the free cash flow from them.
up to 17 years. British Land currently has
During the year ended 31 March 2010 these
two US private placements: £98 million
assets generated £82 million of surplus cash
5.5% Senior Notes 2027 and $154 million
after payment of interest and securitisation
6.3% Senior US Dollar Notes 2015 (which is
amortisation. This will reduce next year as a
swapped back into sterling at 6.0%). Issuing
result of the formation of the Broadgate joint
in this market widens the debt investor base.
venture. In addition, while investments in joint
Covenants applying across each of ventures do not form part of Unencumbered
these unsecured facilities (having been Assets, profits generated by these ventures
consistently agreed with all lenders are passed up to the Group.
since 2003) are the same:
Derivatives, usually interest rate swaps,
a) Net Borrowings not to exceed 175% are used to achieve the required interest
of Adjusted Capital and Reserves; and rate profile viewed across all the Group debt.
b) Net Unsecured Borrowings not to exceed Non-recourse to British Land

70% of Unencumbered Assets. Joint Ventures and Funds are each financed
and interest rate managed separately, without
No income/interest cover ratios apply to
recourse to British Land for repayment. The
these facilities.
debt has been arranged through securitisation
There are no other unsecured debt financial or bank debt specifically according to the
covenants in the Group. requirements of the business of each venture.
Covenant ratio
As at 31 March 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Net Unsecured Borrowings

to Unencumbered Assets1 26% 28% 22% 6% 14%
Net Borrowings to Adjusted
Capital and Reserves2 73% 74% 74% 83% 37%
Highest during the year to 31 March 2010: 21%1; 91%2
Our Business
Strategy in Action
At 31 March 2010, our share of the total debt in Although a combination of fixed and
the Funds and Joint Ventures is some £2.9 billion. floating rate debt has been issued in
Over the next two years a total of £529 million the securitisations, all the floating rate
(at 100%) of this will mature and these facilities instruments have been fully swapped into
will be addressed by the relevant entities and fixed rate debt, from the date of issue.
refinanced as appropriate for their businesses.
Transaction specific derivatives are employed
Those debt arrangements which include loan by the relevant borrowing entity in the Joint
to value ratio covenants have maximum levels Ventures and Funds to achieve the desired
Performance Review
ranging from 55% to 90% (except for one fund interest rate profile when floating rate debt
in which we have a small interest where the is raised through other debt structures.
LTV is 35%); several of them have rental income
Debentures without recourse to British Land
to interest or debt service cover requirements.
are those issued by BLD Property Holdings
There is no obligation on British Land to remedy
Limited (formerly Asda Property Holdings
any breach of these covenants and any remedy
Limited) a company acquired by the Group
needed would be considered by the parties on
in 2006.
a case by case basis.
There are three fixed rate debentures
Securitisations are used to raise long-term
of £111 million in total:
debt based on the cash flows generated from
> 10.3125% First Mortgage Debenture
specific assets or pools of assets. The strength
Governance
Stock 2011
of these cash flows allows credit-rated debt to
be raised with long maturities. Securitisations
Stock 2014
have been arranged in ring-fenced, special
purpose entities with no recourse to British
Stock 2020
Land or other companies or assets in the Group.
Asset value and income ratio cover requirements
The securitisations of the Broadgate Estate
are managed and remediable as necessary,
(£1,951 million), Meadowhall (£832 million)
in line with our other debentures.
and the Sainsbury’s superstores portfolio
(£678 million) have weighted average
maturities of 15.9 years, 14.2 years, and
10.6 years respectively. The only financial
covenant applicable to these securitisations
is that income must cover interest and
scheduled amortisation (1 times). These
securitisations provide for quarterly principal
repayments with the balance outstanding
reducing to approximately 20-30% of the
original amount raised by expected final
maturity. The debt structures permitted
British Land to introduce third party investors
without requiring repayment of the debt.
Other Information
Over the last two years each of the relevant

entities have been subject to new joint venture
transactions, where British Land effectively
disposed of a 50% share in the investment.

PORTFOLIO VALUATION
Valuation by sector
In the second half of Change2 %
2009/10, property prices
Group
£m
Funds/JVs1
£m
Total
£m
Portfolio
% 3 months 12 months
started to rebound
sharply as investor Retail
Retail warehouses 1,676 999 2,675 31.4 7.7 14.8
demand increased, while Superstores 166 1,136 1,302 15.2 3.4 18.4
supply, particularly of Shopping centres 199 990 1,189 13.9 5.8 3.2
prime, remained limited. Department stores 436 436 5.1 4.0 21.5
All retail 2,477 3,125 5,602 65.6 6.0 13.4
Breakdown of portfolio Office 3
% City 493 1,242 1,735 20.3 10.2 13.3

West End 967 967 11.3 11.5 15.8
Provincial 27 7 34 0.4 1.8 (2.3)
All office 1,487 1,249 2,736 32.0 10.6 13.9
Industrial, distribution,
leisure and other 188 13 201 2.4 7.6 12.8
Total 4,152 4,387 8,539 100.0 7.5 13.5
1 Group’s share of properties in funds and joint ventures.
2 Valuation movement during the period (after taking account of capital expenditure) of properties held at the balance
sheet date, including developments (classified by end use) and purchases.
3 Includes developments in City, West End and provincial: total value £144 million, 1.7% of Portfolio, 6.5% increase for
the 12 months.
65% Retail 32% Office

(85% Out-of-town) (99% London) After falling 30% in the year to March 2009, The valuation movements across our largest
UK commercial real estate prices continued sectors are summarised below:
31% Retail 19% City to fall in the first half of 2009/10, although > Retail warehouses accounted for 31.4% of
warehouses 11% West End
15% Superstores
at a reduced rate. In the second half, prices the portfolio at the year end with valuation
2% Development
14% Shopping centres started to rebound sharply, rising 7.9% in rising by 14.8% in the full year and 7.7% in
5% Department stores 3% Other the third quarter and 4.3% in the fourth, as the quarter. The valuation uplift for the full
investor demand increased, while supply, year was driven by inward initial yield shift
particularly of prime, remained limited. The of 122bps, offset by an ERV decline of 3.7%.
valuation increases were principally driven by In the fourth quarter, inward initial shift was
yield compression: initial yields across the 50bps with ERV growth positive at 0.2%.
property sector fell from 7.5% to 6.5% > Shopping centres accounted for 13.9% of
according to IPD. the portfolio at the year end with valuation
rising by 3.2% for the year and 5.8% for the
The table above shows the principal valuation
fourth quarter. On a like-for-like basis, for
movements of British Land’s portfolio by
the full year, the initial yield shifted inwards
sector for the three and 12 month periods
by 15bps and ERV fell by 5.7%. On the same
to 31 March 2010, totalling 7.5% increase for
basis, the initial yield shifted inwards by
the quarter and 13.5% increase for the year.
35bps in the fourth quarter and ERV fell
The valuation uplift for the year was driven by
by 1.6%.
an inward yield shift of 75bps and ERV decline
of 6.2%. In the fourth quarter, the inward yield
shift was 33bps and ERV growth 1.2%.
Our Business
£8,539 million +13.5%
Total valuation Portfolio valuation
including share of funds and joint ventures in 12 months
Strategy in Action
> Superstores accounted for 15.2% of the lettings, resulted in an overall uplift in Capital ERV
Year ended return growth
portfolio at the year end with valuation valuation of 13.3%. In the quarter inward 31 March 2010 % %
rising by 18.4% in the year and 3.4% in the yield shift and ERV growth were 29bps
Retail 17.6 (3.7)
quarter. The valuation uplift for the year and 3.0%, respectively.
Office 11.6 (8.0)
was driven by a 87bps inward initial yield > West End offices accounted for 11.3% of Total 14.4 (6.2)
shift and ERV growth of 1.2%. For the the portfolio at the year end with valuation
quarter, the inward initial yield shift was rising 15.8% in the year and 11.5% in the IPD 9.7 (5.5)
12bps and ERV growth 0.6%. fourth quarter, The valuation uplift in the As calculated by IPD
> City offices accounted for 20.3% of the full year was driven by lettings of newly
Performance Review
portfolio at the year end with the valuation completed buildings, inward initial yield The capital return from the portfolio was
rising by 10.2% in the fourth quarter and shift of 51bps on the investments and 14.4% for the year to 31 March 2010, and
13.3% for the year as a whole. Over the year a decrease in ERV of 8.0%. In the fourth 7.8% for the fourth quarter, as measured by
we saw inward initial yield shift of 29bps quarter, inward yield shift and ERV growth IPD (calculated for our UK assets on average
on the investments which, coupled with were 27bps and 5.2%, respectively. capital employed and excluding capitalised
the decrease in ERV of 9.3% and additional interest). This compares favourably with the
IPD benchmark which was 9.7% and 4.3%, for
the full year and fourth quarter, respectively.
Portfolio yields (excluding developments)
The net equivalent yield (after notional
Reversionary Top up Reversionary Net
Annualised income2 Initial Initial yield3 equivalent purchaser’s costs) on the portfolio at
Governance
net rents1 (5 years) yield3 yield3,5 (5 years) yield4 6.0% has moved in 49bps over the quarter
£m £m % % % %
and 125bps for the year.
Retail
Retail warehouses 160 14 6.1 6.3 6.7 6.0 In retail, like-for-like ERV was down 3.7%
Superstores 72 1 5.5 5.5 5.6 5.2 for the year with the decline decelerating
Shopping centres 79 9 6.7 7.0 7.4 6.4 significantly by the fourth quarter when
Department stores 27 4 6.1 6.9 7.0 6.7 it was down by only 0.2%. In office, ERV
fell in the year by 8.0% but was ahead by
All retail 338 28 6.1 6.3 6.6 6.0
3.8% in the fourth quarter. For the year
Office to March 2010, like-for-like ERV for the
City 86 21 5.2 7.3 6.5 6.1 portfolio was down 6.2% (IPD down 5.5%),
West End 45 18 4.8 6.1 6.7 5.7
primarily due to our weighting in London
All office 131 39 5.1 6.9 6.5 5.9 offices but was ahead 1.2% in the fourth
Industrial, distribution, quarter (IPD benchmark -0.4%).
leisure and other 16 3 8.6 9.4 10.3 9.8 At current market values, and without
Total 485 70 5.8 6.6 6.7 6.0 projecting any growth or inflation, achievement
of the reversionary income in the investment
Data for Group and its share of funds and joint ventures.
1 Net rental income under IFRS differs from annualised net rents which are cash based, due to accounting portfolio would add £70 million per annum
items such as spreading lease incentives and contracted future rental uplifts, as well as direct property costs. to our annual passing rent. Included in this are
2 Includes rent reviews and lease break/expiry and letting of vacant space at current ERV (as determined by contracted increases of £61 million per annum
external valuers) within five years, plus expiry of rent-free periods.
3 Gross yield to British Land (without notional purchasers’ costs). due from expiry of rent-free periods and
4 After purchasers’ costs. fixed/minimum uplifts. (It should be noted
Other Information
5 Adding back £61 million of contracted rent-frees and minimum rental uplifts. that accounting policies under IFRS require
that portions of these contracted rents are
anticipated in the Group’s income statement.)

SECTOR AND ASSET ALLOCATION
We regularly review our property portfolio

to ensure that the Group’s capital is optimally
allocated both in terms of long-term secular
£1,312 million
trends and shorter-term market movements. BL share of disposals
of which £1,066 million from Broadgate JV
Stephen Smith
Chief Investment Officer
£247 million
BL share of purchases
We regularly review our property portfolio enable us to share the significant risks
The disposals reduced our to ensure that the Group’s capital is optimally and rewards associated with revitalising
exposure to excessively large allocated both in terms of long-term secular Broadgate where the majority of the buildings
single properties and properties trends and shorter-term market movements. are now over 20 years old. During the year,
with lower growth potential. Our aim is to focus our investment in sectors we also reduced our exposure to department
and properties with positive medium to stores in non-core locations.
15%
long-term supply/demand dynamics which
We expected to see a significant number
will enable the Group to generate superior
of investment opportunities during the year
total returns through a combination of secure
driven by a combination of distressed portfolio
and growing income streams and real growth
Share of Broadgate in total portfolio sales and the scarcity and cost of bank debt
in capital value. We recycle capital, disposing
finance for development. Accordingly, we
of assets with limited growth potential, to
actively monitored a range of opportunities
re-invest in assets with greater short or
in our core office and retail markets, and also
Over the next year, we long-term upside.
in alternative asset classes where we believed
expect to become During the year, we continued to reshape high returning investment opportunities
significantly more active our portfolio, completing property disposals could arise. However, the flow of investment
in investment markets as of £1.3 billion and acquisitions of £247 million. opportunities during the year was limited,
the inevitable reshaping of Our asset allocation strategy remained of generally disappointing quality and at
the real estate landscape focused on high-quality offices in Central prices which were difficult to justify on any
gathers momentum. London and principally out-of-town retail fundamental view of future performance.
locations which we believe are well placed The scale of our investment programme
to benefit from future growth. during the year was relatively modest as
a result, the most notable acquisition being
The disposals reduced our exposure to large
50% of the Surrey Quays Shopping Centre
single properties and properties with lower
in South London.
growth potential. The most significant
disposal was that of a 50% interest in our
Property market outlook
Broadgate estate to Blackstone in November.
We remain alert to the possibility of further
The transaction reduced our exposure to a
market dislocation due to financial and
mature asset which will demand significant
economic developments and while we will
re-investment in the coming years and
continue to act with caution in the coming
reduced the weighting of Broadgate within
period, we have entered 2010 in a more
our portfolio from 26% to 15%. The sale will
Our Business
Strategy in Action
Sales optimistic frame of mind. We are particularly
Price BL share
encouraged by the apparent strength of the
12 months to 31 March 2010 £m £m London occupier market as evidenced by our
Retail recent letting of a substantial volume of space
18 Department stores1 209 139 at Regent’s Place and Ropemaker Place.
9 Retail warehouses2 252 84
Over the next year, we expect to become
2 High street shops 5 5
significantly more active in investment
466 228 markets as the inevitable reshaping of the
Performance Review
Office real estate landscape gathers momentum.
Broadgate (50% JV) 1,066 1,066 We do not expect to make a major asset
8-10 Throgmorton Avenue, London EC2 7 7 allocation shift in 2010 but do believe we can
1,073 1,073 continue to accumulate assets which will add
to the quality of our portfolio. We believe that
Others 14 11 relatively static market conditions will give
Total 1,553 1,312 way to a considerably more active investment
market towards the end of 2010 and in 2011
1 Includes 7 Debenhams, and 11 House of Fraser Stores (held in BL Fraser JV).
at which time secondary quality asset prices
2 5 HUT, 2 HIF, 1 PREF and 1 BL.
will adjust to reflect an increase in market
Purchases volume and modest growth potential for
Governance
secondary assets.
Price BL share
12 months to 31 March 2010 £m £m Our expectation is that prime yields will
Retail remain at current levels for the foreseeable
Surrey Quays Shopping Centre3 45 23 future and in some instances will become
Surrey Quays, Tesco Superstore3 52 26 slightly firmer. The secondary end of the
Clifton Moor, Tesco Superstore3 51 26 market could become capital constrained
Clifton Moor, Retail Park3 27 13 while capital for the majority of developments
Sunderland Hylton Riverside Retail Park 19 7 is likely to be scarce and expensive. We believe
Macclesfield Sainsbury’s Superstore 32 32
that the market will continue to polarise
Dumbarton Retail Park – land option 2 2
between extremes in which good quality
Additional PREF Units 35 35
assets subject to secure long-term leases
HUT Convertible Bonds 43 43
will continue to be priced at current levels
306 207 and the value of riskier assets, for which
Office
the market could be thin, may begin to drift.
39 Victoria Street, London SW1 40 40
We intend to continue to accumulate assets
40 40
on a case by case basis, using our expertise to
Total 346 247 re-engineer near-prime and secondary assets
to create the prime of tomorrow. Specifically,
Price BL Share we will develop in our chosen Central London
Since 31 March 2010 £m £m
markets and continue to expand our prime
2-14 Baker Street, London W1 29 29 retail parks.
Other Information
3 New Tesco JV.

RETAIL
Anticipating key retail real estate trends,

our portfolio is heavily biased towards prime
out-of-town retail locations offering flexible
15 million sq ft
formats which are well positioned to capture Retail space
rental growth from secular trends in
consumer demand.
Charles Maudsley
Head of Retail
48%
Share of retail warehouses
in retail portfolio
Retail snapshot
Retail portfolio
% 2009/10

Portfolio value £5,602 million

Occupancy rate 99%
Average lease length to first break 13.9 years
% of rent subject to break or expiry over next three years 4.9%
Share of rent from food retailers 28%
British Land is one of the largest owners a wide range of trading formats. This allows
48% Retail warehouses of retail investment property in the UK. us to proactively manage the portfolio to
23% Superstores We manage or have an interest in retail deliver the most attractive accommodation
21% Shopping centres property worth £5.6 billion comprising wholly for retailers and drive rental performance.
8% Department stores owned assets and our interest in funds and The current restrictive planning regime limits
joint ventures. Our portfolio encompasses developments of new space, resulting in
15 million sq ft of retail space (Group share) increased demand for existing high-quality
including 93 retail warehouse properties, retail accommodation. The strong defensive
102 superstores and 10 shopping centres. qualities of our prime portfolio are evident
in the snapshot table above.
Anticipating key retail real estate trends,
our portfolio is heavily biased towards prime
2009/10 performance
out-of-town retail locations offering flexible
While the economic environment over the last
formats which are well positioned to capture
12 months has remained challenging, lower
rental growth from secular trends in
interest rates have had a beneficial impact on
consumer demand.
consumer spending. The retail sector as a
Our portfolio of retail warehouse parks, whole has been more robust than expected
superstores, department stores and shopping although the performance of individual
centres benefits from flexible planning retailers has been mixed.
consents making the portfolio adaptable to
Our Business
Strategy in Action
Performance Review
Governance
Other Information
Giltbrook Retail Park, Nottingham

RETAIL CONTINUED
Capital return ERV growth In spite of the weather conditions in the first
BL IPD BL IPD quarter of 2010 the trend remained stable.
(including funds and joint ventures for BL) % % % % We continue to monitor footfall as a leading
All retail 17.6 12.2 (3.7) (4.9) indicator of performance.
Retail warehousing 21.5 20.5 (3.7) (4.4)
Shopping centres 6.6 2.5 (5.7) (5.4) Occupier market and activity
Superstores 18.8 – 1.2 – Over the 12 months, retailers continued to
Department stores1 21.2 – (9.0) – face difficult trading conditions as consumers
1 Includes high street. looked for value for money. Retailers such as
New Look, Peacocks and Poundland have all
reported strong growth and are continuing
The retail property market saw a decline ERV on the portfolio fell by approximately with their expansion plans.
in rental values during the 12 months, which 3.7% compared to the market of 4.9% over
Trading improved more than expected by
was more pronounced for secondary assets the period, proving the resilience of prime
most commentators in the second half.
where the supply demand tension is weakest. assets with flexible planning consents.
Many retailers produced positive like-for-like
Consumer restraint limited spend on large Superstores were the largest contributor to
trading figures, albeit from low bases, and
discretionary items putting retail parks with rental performance with positive ERV growth
also maintained margins enabling them to
restrictive planning consents under increased of 1.2% while shopping centres have seen
protect profit.
pressure. Many town centre retail schemes a considerable fall in ERV of 5.7%. ERV at
which offer limited scope for flexible retail Meadowhall was down by 4.8%, demonstrating Retail occupiers remain cautious on the year
formats have suffered rental weakness, good performance relative to its subsector. ahead. Likely economic challenges include
with further risk of rental decline as retailers Retail warehouses saw a wide divergence increased taxation and government spending
review their occupational requirements. in ERV performance with better quality open reductions – all potential factors that could
In contrast, British Land’s prime assets A1 planning consented schemes in the region adversely impact consumer spending.
benefited from a number of retailers of -3.0% and poorer quality restricted
beginning to be more acquisitive. planning consented schemes at -7.6%. We have continued to proactively manage the
retail portfolio. We delivered 376 new lettings
Our key focus during the past year has been to: During the year, 2.0% of our retail portfolio
and lease renewals with a further 224 rent
> maintain our high levels of occupancy: by passing rent fell into administration. Of the
reviews settled in the year. Maintaining high
99% at 31 March 2010; 75 units affected by administration, 40 were
occupancy in a weak occupational market
> work with retailers to provide flexible, re-let by the end of the year at rents marginally
demonstrates the quality of the retail portfolio.
well configured accommodation to higher than the previous passing rent on
We continue to discuss opportunities across
facilitate higher sales volumes driving average. The assignment or re-let of a
our portfolio offering a range of high-quality
improved property performance; and further 11 units is in solicitors’ hands, leaving
locations to retailers.
> retain our prime assets with strong 24 units where we are continuing to liaise
underlying retailer performance and to with potential occupiers. Major asset management initiatives during the
dispose of those with limited potential. year included:
Like-for-like income growth for the year was
> 28 long term lettings at Meadowhall taking
The British Land retail portfolio outperformed 2.1% with retail warehousing contributing
the occupancy level from 95.7% to 98.1%;
IPD capital return by 4.8% in the year. Retail 3.7%, superstores 3.1% and shopping centres
> 20 rent reviews settled across the
warehousing, superstores and department -2.2%. Our average rental levels for retail
superstore portfolio adding £1.3 million of
stores all significantly outperformed the index. property continue to be sustainable and with
additional rent;
While shopping centres underperformed the a rate per sq ft of £21, we believe there is
> 10 long term lettings at Glasgow Fort on
retail market overall, our shopping scope for rental growth.
average 4.1% above ERV; and
centres outperformed the shopping centre
We are also encouraged by improving > Continued strong retailer relationships, for
subsector with Meadowhall generating a
trends in footfall. Over the 12 months, footfall example 22 leasing deals with Next, Dreams
total return of 14.9%.
increased by 4.2% at our retail parks and and Arcadia in excess of 250,000 sq ft.
decreased by 1% at our shopping centres.
Our Business
99% 13.9 years 750,000 sq ft
Occupancy rate Average lease length Retail planning consent
at 31 March 2010 to first break available to implement
Strategy in Action
New lettings and lease renewals Looking ahead
(including funds and joint ventures) Looking ahead, our primary focus will be to
Rent, £m pa1
maximise the opportunities within the existing
portfolio, to acquire additional assets where
Sq ft BL share
Year ended 31 March 2010 Number ’000 New total2 of increase3 we believe the fundamentals are under-priced
and to continue with selective sales where
Retail warehouses 144 1,386 24.9 0.8
long-term growth is limited.
Shopping centres 229 440 17.6 3.0
High street 3 14 0.2 0.2 We believe there should continue to be
Performance Review
Retail total 376 1,840 42.7 4.0 robust retailer demand for modern flexible
accommodation in prime locations, adaptable
to changing formats. We will seek to build on
Rent reviews existing relationships and add to our existing
(including funds and joint ventures) portfolio by acquiring prime assets with
Rent, £m pa growth potential, or assets which can be
Sq ft BL share
remodelled or extended. The purchase of
Year ended 31 March 2010 Number ’000 New total2 of increase3 a 50% interest in Surrey Quays Shopping
Retail warehouses 109 1,608 44.2 5.2 Centre is a good example of this strategy.
Shopping centres 87 420 16.2 0.8 With respect to asset types, we will add to the
Superstores 20 964 17.6 1.3
portfolio in our key sub-sectors, out-of-town
Governance
High street 8 601 5.0 0.4
retail warehouses and superstores, and
Retail total 224 3,593 83.0 7.7 in “in-town” locations where the conditions,
1 Net effective rent (taking into account tenant incentives). including the planning environment, are
2 Includes 100% share of funds and joint ventures. favourable to an adjustment to affordable rents.
3 Increase above previous rent.
We remain alert to the real risk of continuing
rental deflation and the reality of lease
Investment market Development expiries and administrations across the retail
Investor sentiment improved in the second We continue to progress development and sector. However, we feel well placed with our
half, and this was evident in strong demand extension opportunities across the portfolio. high-quality asset base, which is supported
for prime retail assets and an improvement During the year 322,000 sq ft of retail space by lettings currently taking place across
in investment values. was granted planning consent creating the the portfolio, and will take advantage of any
potential for additional valuable accommodation potential weakness in the market by investing
In recent months, values for secondary retail
for retailers and increased capital values. where we see fundamentals being mispriced.
assets have stabilised and strengthened in
certain instances. We believe that a number Across the retail portfolio, we have 750,000 sq ft
of transactions for secondary assets are of retail planning consent available to implement.
being completed at levels that are difficult to
We continually review the viability of our
justify on a fundamental view of future rental
schemes and will selectively look to
performance. We expect that while prime
implement development plans when we
will stabilise at current levels, and in some
feel that the supply demand balance is
instances could appreciate slightly, we
right, delivering attractive accommodation
could see a steady decline in the value
Other Information
to the retailers.
of secondary assets.

RETAIL CONTINUED
PORTFOLIO
>
RETAIL
WAREHOUSE
Total value £4.1 billion

British Land share £2.7 billion
Retail warehouse properties 93
Retail parks 69 GLASGOW FORT SHOPPING NUGENT SHOPPING PARK,

PARK, GLASGOW (HUT) ORPINGTON
Solus units 24
Total floor area 12.7 million sq ft British Land share 36% British Land share 100%
With open A1 use 82% Size 389,000 sq ft Size 116,300 sq ft
Long leasehold open A1 park Open A1 park
Units 67 Units 23
Predominantly freehold, Rent passing, Kiosks 11

British Land’s share £160 million pa
Average rent £21.55 per sq ft Weighted
average lease term including breaks
11.4 years Occupancy levels 99%
We are the largest investment manager Key tenants Key tenants

of retail warehouse parks in the UK, with Asda Living, Next, Argos, Zara, Arcadia, Boots, M&S, Mothercare, Laura Ashley, Next, Debenhams,
the next largest owner having approximately New Look, Republic, TK Maxx, River Island, HMV, Pets at Home
6.2 million sq ft. The retail warehouse Sports Direct, Mamas & Papas
portfolio is dominated by prime open Developments in the year
A1 planning consented schemes giving us Developments in the year The park has benefited from the 20,000 sq ft retail
the flexibility to mould the accommodation The park continues to perform well with strong development during the year. The additional
to current retailer space requirements. retailer demand. We have had an active 12 months space has created two new units – 10,000 sq ft has
with a number of deals including a letting to been let to Pets at Home and the remaining unit
Retailers’ drive to reduce occupational costs
Sports Direct and the letting of the Borders space is currently under offer to a leading retail brand.
whilst maintaining a level of accommodation
to New Look. In addition, the unit previously let to The additional tenants and strong occupier demand
flexibility has allowed us to drive our proactive
The Pier, which went into administration in 2009, demonstrate the continued strength of the scheme.
asset management approach. The average
has now been let to the high street retailer Republic
retail warehouse rent provides scope to grow
for their second out-of-town store.
rental levels from the prime portfolio whilst
benefiting from high occupancy levels and The scheme also has a resolution to grant
strong average unexpired lease terms. planning consent for a further 175,000 sq ft
of retail accommodation.
Our Business
RETAIL WAREHOUSE PORTFOLIO: £2.7 BILLION,
DOMINATED BY PRIME OPEN A1 PLANNING
CONSENTED SCHEMES.
Strategy in Action
Performance Review
TEESSIDE SHOPPING PARK, BEEHIVE CENTRE,
STOCKTON-ON-TEES CAMBRIDGE SOLUS OPEN PARKS
British Land share 100% British Land share 100% British Land share 93%
Governance
Phase 1 Size 227,000 sq ft Size 1,168,000 sq ft
Open A1 retail space 385,000 sq ft
Open restricted retail space Open bulky retail space
Phase 2
Retail and leisure 57,000 sq ft Units on site 15 Parks 24
Phase 3
Unit 8,000 sq ft
with development potential on a 27 acre site
Key tenants Key tenants Key tenants
M&S, New Look, Asda Living, Arcadia, Next, Boots, Next, M&S Simply Food, Carpetright, Argos, B&Q, Homebase
WHSmith, Currys, PC World, JJB Dreams, Toys R Us, Pets at Home
Developments in the year
Developments in the year Developments in the year Working with our solus occupiers, we regeared
The park continues to trade and perform well. Refurbishment of the scheme was completed eight B&Q leases by lowering the rental income
We have settled six rent reviews on phase 1 in the during the year and has generated increased and extending the lease terms including RPI linked
12-month period, adding £567,000 of additional rent tenant demand. The 15 unit scheme has seen annual uplifts in rent. This transaction had a direct
and on average at 3.1% above the preceding ERV. three major lettings during the 12-month period. benefit on the retailer whilst giving us certainty of
A further review has been settled on phase 2 Allied Carpets unit was re-let to Next Home and rental increases on these larger stores. The proactive
and the stand-alone Pets at Home unit provides a vacant unit has been taken by TK Maxx Home asset management initiative demonstrates our
a further £127,000 of additional rent. Sense. JJB upsized to a 21,000 sq ft unit, moving ability to work with our occupiers.
Other Information
into the DW Sports space while M&S Simply Food

The Borders unit is currently under offer to two
took the former JJB. The scheme is now fully let.
new retailers. The completion of the transactions
As a result, the average rents have increased from
will return the scheme to a 100% occupancy level.
£19.10 per sq ft to £22.40 per sq ft and footfall is
up. In addition, planning has been obtained for a
2,500 sq ft development for Costa Coffee with the
remaining space available to let.

RETAIL CONTINUED
PORTFOLIO
>
SHOPPING
SUPERSTORES CENTRES
Total value £2.4 billion Total value £2.1 billion

British Land share £1.3 billion British Land
share £1.2 billion
Superstores
(Located across England, Wales Shopping centres 10
and Northern Ireland) 102 MEADOWHALL SHOPPING
Retail units 726 CENTRE, SHEFFIELD
Stores larger than 40,000 sq ft 87%
Total floor area 4.4 million sq ft
Average store size 61,000 sq ft Total value £1.2 billion
Total floor area 6.2 million sq ft British Land share £0.6 billion
Retail units 215
Anchor stores 10
28 stores 100% owned 74 stores owned Rent passing, British Land’s share Rent passing, British Land’s share £38 million pa
in JVs, Rent passing, British Land’s share £79 million pa Average rent £26.20 per sq ft Average rent £54 per sq ft Weighted average
£72 million pa Average rent £20.80 per sq ft Weighted average lease term including lease term including breaks 11.2 years, to
Weighted average lease term to break breaks 10.8 years Occupancy level 98% expiry 11.7 years
(and expiry) 17.6 years
Tenants Our shopping centre portfolio is anchored Key tenants

Sainsbury’s (44), Somerfield (14), Tesco (35), by the regionally dominant 1.5 million sq ft Debenhams, House of Fraser, Marks & Spencer,
Others (9) prime out-of-town Meadowhall Shopping Primark, Bhs, Boots, H&M, Top Shop/Top Man,
Centre in Sheffield. The remaining nine Hollister, Zara
We are the largest investment holder of
shopping centres are low rise centres
supermarkets outside of the supermarkets Meadowhall remains one of the largest and most
with flexible physical structures offering
themselves, with Tesco and Sainsbury’s successful shopping centres in the UK – a prime
attractive retailing accommodation.
accounting for approximately 24% of our super regional centre in a densely populated
total retail rent roll. Our food store portfolio We have actively looked to recycle capital catchment area.
continues to benefit from strong locations away from secondary in-town shopping
In addition to the retail units, the shopping centre has
with limited obsolescence drag leading to centres (British Land sales of assets such
55 kiosks, an 11-screen cinema and 27 restaurants
a 100% occupancy. 77% of our superstores as East Kilbride, Queensmere Slough and
and cafes with seating for 3,300 people.
benefit from open market rent review clauses Woking) in recent times anticipating retailer
allowing us to capture increased demand/ distress and occupational weakness. Meadowhall has approximately 24 million visitors
supply tension between operators. We continue to see weakness in secondary per year – 800,000 per week at peak time. Footfall
retail centres with increased vacancy for the calendar year ending 31 December 2009
Our partnership with the food retailers
or imminent lease expiries where supply/ was unchanged from the previous year.
remains strong. In December 2009 we
demand dynamics are skewed.
completed the renewal of our £570 million Occupancy level improved from 96% to 98% during
joint venture with Tesco PLC for a further Our occupancy level and average unexpired the 12 months.
10 years. lease term retains a well balanced supply/
demand dynamic.
Our Business
SUPERSTORES, SHOPPING CENTRES AND
DEPARTMENT STORES PORTFOLIO: £2.9 BILLION,
WELL POSITIONED TO CAPTURE RENTAL
GROWTH FROM SECULAR TRENDS.
Strategy in Action
DEPARTMENT
STORES
Performance Review
SURREY QUAYS SHOPPING ST STEPHEN’S SHOPPING
CENTRE, SOUTH LONDON CENTRE, HULL
British Land share 50% British Land share 100% Total value £0.4 billion
100%
Governance
Area 309,000 sq ft Area 410,000 sq ft British Land share
Retail units 43 Retail units 52 Department stores 10
Size 2.2 million sq ft
Rent passing, British Land’s share £3 million pa Rent passing, British Land’s share £7 million pa Rent passing, British Land’s share
Average rent £21 per sq ft Weighted average Average rent £17 per sq ft Weighted average £27 million pa Average rent £11 per sq ft
lease term including breaks 6 years, to expiry lease term including breaks 10 years, to Weighted average lease term including
6 years expiry 11 years breaks 28 years, to expiry 30 years
Key tenants Key tenants Nine stores on 1.7 million sq ft are leased
BHS, Boots, Currys Digital, New Look, River Island, Anchored by 147,000 sq ft Tesco to Debenhams for a minimum unexpired term
JD Sports, Tesco, WHSmith. of 24 years. The leases provide for minimum
Cult, H&M, Next, New Look, Oasis, River Island,
2.5% pa rental increases and five-yearly
The 50% acquisition of Surrey Quays strengthened TK Maxx, Zara.
open market reviews from 2019.
our shopping centre portfolio. The asset provides
strong proactive asset management opportunities Developments in the year We also own the 490,000 sq ft House of Fraser
with strong fundamentals with the opportunity to 10 new lettings were realised during the year store in Corporation Street, Birmingham.
increase the trading floor area and benefit from including a new 9,300 sq ft Cult, The Entertainer, The lease is subject to break in 2042 with the
underlying occupier demand in a growing suburb Argos and Model Zone. Hull Primary Care Trust expiry in 2061. The rent is subject to fixed uplift
of London. also opened a new 4,600 sq ft healthy living centre in 2011. The average rent of £9 per sq ft is
in the shopping centre, a first in the UK. enhanced through contractual rental uplifts
Developments in the year through the term of the lease with an average
Other Information
Surrey Quays was under our management for only unexpired lease term of 32 years.
three months, however in this period, we have settled
one rent review and let two units at or above ERV
demonstrating the underlying strength of this asset.

Our Business
OFFICE
Strategy in Action
The Group’s office strategy is to concentrate
on prime assets in London where we believe
in the medium term there will be improving
occupier demand and limited supply –
characteristics which should lead to rental
growth and investor demand.
Tim Roberts
Head of Offices
Performance Review
Offices snapshot
2009/10

Portfolio value £2,736 million

Occupancy rate 93%
Governance
Average lease length to first break 9.6 years
% of rent subject to break or expiry over next three years 10.2%
British Land’s office portfolio is focused on management from estate services to the
the London market. As at 31 March 2010, the development of new buildings.
Group owned or managed properties valued
Customer focus ultimately helps us to retain
at £4.0 billion through a combination of wholly
and attract occupiers. Occupiers are willing
owned assets and the Broadgate JV. The
to commit to long leases for the right building
Group’s share of these properties was worth
which is why at 9.6 years, our average lease
£2.7 billion at the same date.
length is well ahead of the IPD average for
The Group’s office strategy is to concentrate offices of 7.2 years.
on prime assets in London where we believe
in the medium term there will be improving 2009/10 performance
occupier demand and limited supply – The Group’s London offices performed well
characteristics which should lead to rental during the year, fuelled by a pick up in investor
growth and investor demand. Our aim is demand and an improvement in the occupier
to invest in properties which have enduring market. As a result, our portfolio delivered
occupier appeal, and our customer focus a capital return over the year of 11.6%
is on providing modern, high-quality and compared to IPD All offices of 7.5%. Significantly,
Other Information
well located accommodation to meet the while the full year suffered an ERV decline of
requirements of financial and business 8.0%, recent performance data suggests that
service companies based in London. We build we have seen the nadir of the rental cycle:
on this by offering ‘best in class’ property across our office portfolio in Q4, rents stopped
falling and ERV grew by 3.8% compared with
< IPD All offices of 0.3%.
Ropemaker Place
Ropemaker Place, EC2, achieved practical
completion in May 2009 and is now over 90% let.

OFFICE CONTINUED
Capital return ERV growth Occupancy movements

BL IPD BL IPD Sq ft1 Occupancy
(including funds and joint ventures for BL) % % % % ’000 rate1
All offices 11.6 7.5 (8.0) (7.9) As at 31 March 2009 315 94%
City offices 9.8 9.7 (9.3) (8.4) – new space completed in 09/10 970 -15%
West End offices 18.3 15.3 (8.0) (10.1) – disposals and acquisitions (166) -6%
Total available space
to let in 09/10 1,119
Managing our portfolio balance effectively is We are pleased to say that we have secured – new lettings on buildings
key to our strategy. Our medium term more than our fair share of new lettings, completed in prior year (46) 2%
objective has been to make the Office portfolio owing mainly to our customer focus. – new lettings on buildings
completed in the year (753) 18%
more balanced between the City and the We have attracted a number of high profile
At at 31 March 2010 320 93%
West End and to reduce the dominance of new occupiers to our portfolio, including
the 4.4 million sq ft Broadgate estate in the Macquarie Group, Gazprom and Aegis. 1 On a proportionally consolidated basis.
City, which we fully owned until recently. In total we have let 710,000 sq ft, generating
The transfer of Broadgate into a 50:50 JV additional income of £23 million pa, all on Importantly, 91% of our vacant accommodation
with Blackstone in November 2009 was a terms that beat our valuer’s expectations, is modern. We are confident that we will
significant step in achieving our objectives. so the lettings are significantly accretive continue to attract new occupiers and that we
to performance. With average lease lengths can exceed our valuers’ average assumptions
We have invested capital in two new acquisitions
to first break of 13 years, these lettings have on letting voids of 45 months and a rent of
in the West End, one in Victoria Street and the
also improved the office portfolio’s security £41.50 per sq ft. If we are successful in doing
other on Baker Street (Portman Square). As a
of income. this we can add significant value and income
result, our percentage value split between City
to the portfolio.
and West End has now moved from 75/25 to We successfully rented the majority of space
64/36. We have taken the decision to develop created by developments in the last two years Managing our buildings to the requirements
existing sites such as NEQ at Regent’s Place, in the City, namely The Broadgate Tower and and expectations of our customers lies at
and have agreed non-binding Heads of Terms 201 Bishopsgate at Broadgate and Ropemaker the heart of our success. In 2009, 82% of
to build a significant office building for UBS, Place, and in the West End, 10 and 20 Triton our customers rated British Land as good or
our anchor tenant, at Broadgate. Street at Regent’s Place. Key deals included: excellent as a landlord – an increase from 73%
> at Ropemaker Place, an additional in 2007. More information is provided in the
Occupier market and activity 349,000 sq ft of lettings during the year Business Sustainability section of this report.
Despite the severe downturn in 2009, we have leaving the building 91% occupied;
already seen in 2010 a recovery in the outlook > at Broadgate Tower: 89,000 sq ft with 72% Investment market and transactions
for the businesses that we serve in London, occupancy; and The investment market saw a marked
and signs that occupiers now have the > at 10 and 20 Triton Street: 206,000 sq ft improvement through the year. In the first
confidence to make decisions and to commit with 59% occupancy. half, investor demand was primarily focused
to space. Consequently, occupier take up of on prime, well-let buildings and tended to be
The benefit of the high level of letting activity
office accommodation in London during the dominated by overseas buyers tempted by
during the year predominantly offset the
first quarter of 2010 has been the strongest the relatively attractive income returns on
dilutive effect of the additional space we
since the beginning of the decade. Across offer, supported by the weakness of Sterling.
completed, resulting in an occupancy level of
London, the 12 month rolling total for take The second half of the year saw a far greater
93%, marginally lower than last year’s 94%.
up of 9.7 million sq ft was close to the 10 year range of investor demand, including UK
average. Take up in the City has been institutions and REITs, looking to invest in
particularly strong. These are all encouraging a broader range of property.
signs for the health of the occupier market.
Our Business
93% 9.6 years 710,000 sq ft
Occupancy rate Average lease length New lettings and lease renewals
at 31 March 2010 to first break in 2009/10
Strategy in Action
New lettings and lease renewals 1950s and is largely vacant. Planning consent
(including joint ventures) was granted in 2009 for a new 139,000 sq ft
Rent, £m pa1
office with retail units at ground floor level.
Redevelopment is planned to start during the
Sq ft BL share
Year ended 31 March 2010 Number ’000 New total2 of increase3 course of this year with completion in 2013.
The total cost of development including land
City 47 476 16.1 14.4
and interest is expected to be around
West End 22 234 9.4 8.6
£114 million.
Office Total 69 710 25.5 23.0
Performance Review
Of which recently completed developments 23 644 23.1 21.8 Developments
In addition to Baker Street, we have two
committed and agreed developments. We have
Rent reviews announced the 500,000 sq ft development
(including joint ventures) of the North East Quadrant of Regent’s Place
Rent, £m pa (NEQ). We have agreed non-binding Heads
Sq ft BL share of Terms with UBS to develop a significant
Year ended 31 March 2010 Number ’000 New total2 of increase3 office building at 4 and 6 Broadgate, and in
City 16 389 17.1 0.3 so doing, retaining UBS as an anchor tenant,
West End 7 73 2.9 0.5 and upgrading the estate.
Other 3 45 1.2 0.0
Governance
We are also exploring the restart of the
Office Total 26 507 21.2 0.8 Leadenhall Building in the City in view of
1 Net effective rent (taking into account tenant incentives).
occupier demand for this iconic building,
2 Includes 100% share of funds and joint ventures. the potential for premium rents materialising
3 Increase above previous rent. in the next few years and interest from good
partners with whom we would like to take
on this challenge.
As the signs of an improving occupier existing portfolio benefits from, also allows
market became more evident, investors us to look at higher risk and return projects.
Looking ahead
were prepared to take on more risk and look Consequently, the two recent West End
Our confidence in the improving occupier
at properties with shorter leases. As a result, acquisitions in Victoria Street and Baker Street
market is not merely predicated in the recent
yields improved on most office properties, (Portman Square) both involve refurbishment
upturn in demand. We believe London’s
(average IPD office initial yield improved over and redevelopment.
competitive advantages as a global financial
the year by ca 100bps) although we estimate
39 Victoria Street is a 76,000 sq ft landmark centre have and will endure the recent
that prime initial yields on London offices
office building based near the important financial turmoil, and that business demand
outperformed, and moved in by 150bps.
Victoria train station terminus. The offices are for accommodation will grow. We are also
The 12 month rolling total of nearly £9 billion
let to the Bank of America until July 2012 at an aware that research shows there is likely to be
investment in the Capital, which is only
average rent of £47 per sq ft. The building is an upturn in structural demand due to the high
marginally down on the 10 year average of
fully occupied and offers regular, good-quality percentage of occupiers, especially in the City,
£10.6 billion, shows the relative liquidity that
floor plates and therefore there is the who have lease expiries around 2013/14. Yet
the London office investment market enjoys.
opportunity for refurbishment on lease expiry, at the same time supply has adjusted, with
We believe that we are at the start of a and reletting in 2013. London vacancy rates at the end of March
Other Information
cyclical upturn in the London office market: 2010 at around 8%, looking relatively stable.
The Baker Street building is situated in a
our investment strategy is aimed at acquiring With limited speculative development under
prime location on the corner of Portman
properties which will benefit from this upturn. construction the outlook is for supply to reduce.
Square, just north of Oxford Street. The
The quality and security of income that our All this bodes well for future rental growth and
existing 93,000 sq ft property was built in the
the performance of our London office portfolio.

OFFICE CONTINUED
PORTFOLIO
>
CITY OFFICES
Broadgate
Broadgate Estate
1-3 Finsbury Avenue – 470,000 sq ft Broadwalk House – 290,000 sq ft
Part of the UBS campus headquarters. Principal occupiers are Ashurst and Calyon.
Total value £2.5 billion
1-3 Broadgate – 375,000 sq ft 1 Appold Street – 235,000 sq ft
British Land share £1.2 billion Principal occupiers include UBS and ICAP. Let to Deutsche Bank over seven floors, with
The property incorporates Broadgate Circle a Virgin Active health club at basement level.
Grade A office retail and leisure facilities.
retail and leisure 10 Exchange Square – 161,000 sq ft
accommodation 4.4 million sq ft 4 Broadgate – 165,000 sq ft Multi-let to tenants including Herbert Smith,
The property has been positioned for Close Brothers, Western Asset Management
Office buildings 16 redevelopment over the short-term, with a and Legg Mason.
number of flexible short-term lets in place.
Size of site 30 acres 201 Bishopsgate – 418,000 sq ft
6 Broadgate – 263,000 sq ft The property was completed in April 2008. The
100% freehold/virtual freehold interests The property is multi-let to tenants including offices are 88% let to Alpari, Henderson, Landesbank
Rent passing, £160 million pa (50% Mitsubishi and UBS with circa 60,000 sq ft vacant Baden-Wurttemburg and Mayer Brown with 39,000
share £80 million) Contracted rent, on the ground and first floors, and has been sq ft under offer and 10,000 sq ft remaining to let.
£184 million pa (50% share £92 million) positioned for redevelopment over the short term.
The Broadgate Tower – 397,000 sq ft
Average office passing rent: £47 per sq ft
100 Liverpool Street – 383,000 sq ft The property was completed in August 2008.
Weighted average lease term including
The office accommodation is occupied by UBS The offices are multi-let to tenants including
breaks 8.2 years, to expiry 10.3 years
with several retail units. Dickson Minto, Gill Jennings, Greenlight, Itochu
Europe plc, Liquidnet, Reed Smith and Regus
Occupiers include: 135 Bishopsgate – 340,000 sq ft with 112,000 sq ft vacant.
Alpari, Ambac, Ashurst, AXA I.M, Comprises part of the RBS City campus
Baring Asset Management, Calyon, Close headquarters. Further City offices:
Brothers, Deutsche Bank, Dickson Minto, Ropemaker Place, EC2 – 594,000 sq ft
F&C Management, Gill Jennings, Greenlight, 155 Bishopsgate – 400,000 sq ft
Ropemaker achieved practical completion in
Henderson Global Investors, Herbert Smith Multi-let to a number of major financial institutions,
May 2009. The offices are multi-let to tenants
LLP, ICAP, Itochu Europe, Legg Mason, including Axa I.M, Baring Asset Management,
including Liberum Capital, Macquarie Group,
Landesbank Baden-Wurttemburg, Liquidnet Norinchukin Bank, RBS Sempra, Sumitomo and
Markit, Mint and The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi
Europe Ltd, Mayer Brown LLP, Mitsubishi Tullet Prebon.
UFJ. The third floor is currently vacant, with
Securities, Norinchukin Bank, RBS, RBS 43,000 sq ft of office accommodation.
Sempra, RCM, Reed Smith LLP, Societe 199 Bishopsgate – 145,000 sq ft
Generale, Sumitomo Trust, Tullet Prebon, The property is let to RBS with Level 8 vacant.
UBS and Western Asset Management.
Exchange House – 390,000 sq ft
Principal occupiers are Herbert Smith, F&C Asset
Management Ltd and Societe Generale.
Our Business
OFFICE PORTFOLIO: £2.7 BILLION,
CONCENTRATION ON PRIME ASSETS
IN THE CITY AND WEST END OF LONDON.
Strategy in Action
>
WEST END OFFICES
Performance Review
Regent’s Place
Regent’s Place
Euston Tower – 380,000 sq ft 20 Triton Street – 255,000 sq ft
The building is arranged over 36 storeys, with the 20 Triton Street reached practical completion in
Total value £685 million office accommodation let to HM Government. December 2009. The 10 storey building provides
circa 245,000 sq ft of office accommodation with
British Land share 100% 1, 4 & 7 Triton Square – 217,000 sq ft 89,000 sq ft let to Gazprom Marketing & Trading
The six storey building provides a mix of office, retail over the sixth to ninth floors. 156,000 sq ft of the
Governance
Office retail and leisure space. The offices of 185,600 sq ft are office accommodation over the ground to fifth
and leisure let to Atos Origin, JP Morgan and London & Capital. floors is currently vacant. The property also
accommodation 1.2 million sq ft provides a community theatre.
350 Euston Road – 125,000 sq ft
Office buildings 6 The offices are multi-let to General Medical Council, Further West End offices:
Elexon, Balfour Beatty, Capital One Bank and
York House, W1 – 132,000 sq ft
Freehold, 100% owned Rent passing, Networking People Limited.
The property was completed in early 2007 and
£30 million pa Contracted rent provides over 90,000 sq ft of office space, 9,000 sq ft
£41.7 million pa Average office passing 338 Euston Road – 114,000 sq ft
of retail space and 22 residential units. British Land
The property is arranged over 17 storeys and is
rent £40 per sq ft Weighted average lease occupies some 40,000 sq ft of the offices as its head
multi-let to six office tenants. The major tenant
term including breaks 9.8 years, to expiry office, and the remainder of the building is fully let
is Hachette Livre, occupying 59,100 sq ft on eight
13.2 years to tenants including Bunzl, GIC, Moor Park Capital,
floors. The other office tenants are Regus, Grant
Hurley Palmer Flatt, HSBC and Patisserie Valerie.
Thornton, Merck Sharp & Dohme, ZS Associates
Occupiers include: and British Telecom. 7,250 sq ft of refurbished
39 Victoria Street, SW1 – 76,000 sq ft
Aegis, Atos Origin, Balfour Beatty, British office accommodation is currently vacant on the
The nine storey building is let in its entirety to the
Telecom, Capital One, Elexon, Gazprom, General sixth floor.
Bank of America until July 2012. Bank of America
Medical Council, HM Government, Hachette has fully underlet the building to nine sub tenants,
Livre, JP Morgan Chase Bank and Regus. 10 Triton Street – 121,000 sq ft
including Finmeccanica, Last Minute.com, Aegis
The property achieved practical completion in
Located on the Marylebone Road/Euston Defence Services and the Labour Party.
September 2009. The property is arranged over
Road corridor, one of London’s main road nine floors with the office accommodation let in its
arteries, Regent’s Place occupies a prominent entirety to Aegis Group. The property also provides
position at the North End of the West End. circa 3,000 sq ft of retail accommodation, which is
Other Information
Four underground stations as well as Euston currently vacant.

Station and Kings Cross St Pancras afford
the area excellent transport links.
The estate comprises a distinctive and

striking mix of buildings, providing offices
and public spaces with a range of facilities
including a creche, health and fitness club,
supermarket and various eateries.

DEVELOPMENT
Completed developments
With constrained supply
in both the City and the Value
March Completed
Rent pa1
West End markets, Sq ft 2010 Sales Total Let Let2

’000 £m £m £m £m %
we are seeing the start
of a reduction in rental Office
Ropemaker 594 352 27.0 24.9 91
incentives and an
10 Triton Street 121 76 5.6 5.5 99
improvement in headline 20 Triton Street 255 146 11.4 4.4 39
rents. We expect this
Total office 970 574 44.0 34.8 77
positive outlook to be
maintained with the supply
of new development Residential
One Osnaburgh Street 110 58
remaining heavily
constrained by the lack Total 1,080 574 58 44.0 34.8
of development finance. 1 Estimated headline rent on unlet plus contracted rents (excludes provision for tenants’ incentives).
2 Based on ERV and includes office, retail and ancillary space.
Our strategy of developing prime

Developing buildings is a fundamental part we completed four new buildings totalling
assets has proven to be robust.
of our business. The activity has different 970,000 sq ft of office and 110,000 sq ft of
During the year we completed four
characteristics, drivers and economics to residential accommodation. Following the
new buildings totalling 970,000 sq ft
those of investments. Development involves recent letting activity and sales, these buildings
of office and 110,000 sq ft of
higher risk than our existing investment are now 77% let with the residential units
residential accommodation.
properties and requires careful management, successfully sold by the end of January 2010.
risk and reward assessment and
Practical completion was achieved in early
1,080,000
consideration of market cycles.
May 2009 on our 594,000 sq ft prime City office
We aim to create well-located, high-quality, development at Ropemaker Place, London
sq ft sustainable buildings with enduring occupier

appeal which offer the best potential to
EC2. Recent lettings have seen Macquarie
Group, Markit, Mint Equities and Liberum
generate premium rents, sustained income Capital added to our initial letting to The Bank
Completed in the year
growth and enhanced investment returns. of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd and Mitsubishi
UFJ Securities International plc. The building
Following a sharp downturn in 2008/09, we
is now 91% let with an average unexpired
have started to see signs of recovery in the
period to first break of 16.3 years.
leasing market. With constrained supply in
both the City and the West End markets, we At Regent’s Place, our 13 acre West End
are seeing the start of a reduction in rental office campus, we achieved practical
incentives and an improvement in headline completion, by mid December 2009, of our
rents. We expect this positive outlook to be two office buildings, 10 and 20 Triton Street,
maintained with the supply of new development totalling 376,000 sq ft and our 110,000 sq ft
remaining heavily constrained by the lack of residential development, One Osnaburgh
development finance. Street. The development, designed by Terry
Farrell and Partners has provided a new
Completed developments ‘front door’ to the estate as well as enhancing
Our strategy of developing prime assets the estate’s facilities with the introduction
has proven to be robust. During the year of a community theatre and additional retail
provision around the new public square.
Our Business
c.£500 million 2,696,000 sq ft
Development spend Committed developments
Strategy in Action
Committed and agreed developments 2-14 Baker Street
Site Construction
As part of the purchase of the building in
PC1 Sq ft value costs2 April 2010 we entered into a joint development
’000 £m £m Planning
agreement with Irish contractor and property
Office company McAleer & Rushe to redevelop the
NE Quadrant, Regent’s Place3 2013 500 29 232 Detailed prime island site on the corner of Portman
2-14 Baker Street 2013 139 29 65 Detailed Square where planning consent was granted
4 and 6 Broadgate4,5 2014 700 54 175 Pre-submission
in 2009 for a new 139,000 sq ft office with retail
Total office 1,339 112 472 units at ground floor level. Redevelopment
Performance Review
is planned to start during the course of 2010
Retail with completion programmed for 2013.
Puerto Venecia, Zaragoza 4 and 6 Broadgate
(shopping centre)6 2012 1,357 29 64 Detailed
The Broadgate joint venture has entered into
Total 2,696 141 536 exclusive non-binding heads of terms to
construct a new building for UBS on the site of
1 Estimated practical completion of construction.
2 Estimated construction cost to complete (excludes site value and finance). 4 and 6 Broadgate. If an agreement is finalised
3 Of which 120,000 sq ft is residential. it will secure the retention of UBS as a key
4 Joint venture (Blackstone) – BL share 50%.
occupier at Broadgate.
5 Approximate floor area, construction costs and timing pending completed agreement with UBS and subject to planning.
6 Joint venture (Eurofund Investments Zaragoza) – BL share 50%.
Governance
Data for Group and its share of Funds and Joint Ventures (except areas shown at 100%). Puerto Venecia, Zaragoza
Puerto Venecia, Zaragoza is a 2.2 million sq ft
regional shopping and leisure project in
The entire office space at 10 Triton Street This coincides with an anticipated gradual
Zaragoza, Spain being developed by a 50%
has been let to Aegis Group plc on a 20-year upturn in occupier demand for new well-
joint venture between British Land and a
lease without breaks and at 20 Triton Street, designed and well-located flexible Grade A
consortium of private investors.
89,000 sq ft has been let to Gazprom office space.
Marketing & Trading Limited with strong The first phase of the scheme opened in 2007
Against this background, we have committed
occupier interest in the remaining space. and consists of the 890,000 sq ft integrated
to our next phase of developments.
retail park with leading operators and notable
All the residential units at One Osnaburgh Street,
anchors such as IKEA, Leroy Merlin, Media
were pre-sold ahead of our expectations North East Quadrant (NEQ), Regent’s Place
Markt and Decathlon.
realising proceeds of £58 million, with market We have detailed planning consent for
prices on the private units proving to be 380,000 sq ft of offices and 120,000 sq ft The successful trading of the first phase
buoyant throughout the market uncertainty of residential accommodation which will form combined with early signs of improving operator
of the last two years. the last phase of Regent’s Place. The office, sentiment in Spain are driving a re-activation of
designed by Wilkinson Eyre, will provide the second stage of the scheme for a targeted
Current development activity a variety of floor plates in a well configured 2012 opening. The second phase consists
Looking ahead, market conditions are looking and flexible building. of a 850,000 sq ft shopping and leisure centre
more favourable towards new development around a 100,000 sq ft lake and anchored
The residential apartments will offer a mix
projects, particularly in London offices. by a 420,000 sq ft department store sold to
of unit sizes adding further residential
Supply remains constrained – with no new the leading Spanish brand of El Corte Ingles.
to Regent’s Place following the successful
development starts in the City over the The shopping mall is anchored by El Corte
development at One Osnaburgh Street.
Other Information
previous six months, the West End restricted Ingles, Primark, Desigual and H&M with the
to smaller schemes and refurbishments, Construction is expected to commence in leisure element anchored by Cinesa. The
and no significant schemes currently in the the summer. shopping and leisure centre is 61.5% pre-let
London pipeline for completion in 2013/14. or sold by floor area with ongoing discussion
with other leading brands.

DEVELOPMENT CONTINUED
PORTFOLIO
>
OFFICE PROSPECTS
Total value £106 million

British Land share £98 million
Leadenhall Building, EC3 Meadowhall Metropolitan
Area 4,090,000 sq ft
The Leadenhall Building, London EC3 Colmore Row, Birmingham

Designed by Rogers Stirk Harbour + Partners, Planning consent was secured in September 2008
The Leadenhall Building the proposed 47-storey building will rise to a height for a landmark 35-storey tower to provide
Detailed planning 610,000 sq ft of 736 ft and provide 610,000 sq ft of the highest 280,000 sq ft of office space in central Birmingham’s
quality office space in the City. The spectacular prime office location. The building will incorporate
Colmore Row scale of the public space at the base of the building, a range of sustainable measures and will provide
Detailed planning 280,000 sq ft featuring mature trees and a range of retail a 30% overall reduction in energy use compared
and amenity provisions, will be unprecedented with current standards. It will also accommodate
Meadowhall Metropolitan
in London. The development’s tapering shape, biodiversity enhancement measures such as
Outline planning 2.2 million sq ft
deferring to St Paul’s Cathedral when viewed green/brown roofs and wildlife boxes.
from the west, delivers varied sizes of floor
New Century Park
plates, all with spectacular views over London. Meadowhall Metropolitan
Outline planning 1 million sq ft
With planning consent for a 2.2 million sq ft mixed
Demolition and preliminary basement works
use scheme including office, residential, a new
have been completed. We are reviewing the
riverside park and a range of measures to enhance
design and construction proposals alongside
the biodiversity of the area the project is intended
a reassessment of the timing for delivery of
to act as a catalyst for the wider regeneration
these offices into the market.
of the Lower Don Valley and the area immediately
adjacent to our Meadowhall Shopping Centre.
New Century Park, Coventry

Through a joint venture with Goodman Real
Estate (UK) Limited, we have recently received
resolution to grant planning consent for a revised
mixed use scheme of 1.0 million sq ft which
includes a range of commercial and hotel space
and 365 residential units.
Our Business
Strategy in Action
>
RETAIL PROSPECTS OTHER PROSPECTS
£253 million
Performance Review
Total value Theale
Working with Countryside Properties, we
British Land share £93 million have residential planning consent for 350
Fort Kinnaird Shopping Park residential units.
Area 747,000 sq ft
Canada Water
Fort Kinnaird In joint venture with Canada Quays Limited,
Edinburgh, Fort Kinnaird is owned by The Gibraltar we have a Development Agreement with
Fort Kinnaird Limited Partnership, which is a 50% joint venture the London Borough of Southwark for the
Detailed planning 110,000 sq ft between Hercules Unit Trust and The Crown Estate. development of a major mixed use scheme,
The 110,000 sq ft extension to the existing scheme which includes master planning 40 acres
Glasgow Fort of 506,000 sq ft has detailed planning consent with of the Rotherhithe Peninsula including the
Detailed planning 175,000 sq ft
Governance
ongoing discussions with key retailers. site of our recently acquired Surrey Quays
Shopping Centre. Eight acres have been
Broughton Park
Glasgow Fort sold to Barratt Homes where construction
Detailed planning 140,000 sq ft
Glasgow Fort is owned by the Hercules Unit Trust. continues on 828 residential units where we
Phase 2 consists of a 175,000 sq ft extension which participate in a share of the sale proceeds.
Whiteley Village
has a resolution to grant detailed planning consent
Outline/detailed planning 322,000 sq ft
subject to completion of a section 75 agreement. Euston Station
The development is to be anchored by an We have been working up proposals for
80,000 sq ft unit pre-let to Marks & Spencer. the redevelopment of Euston Station in
partnership with Network Rail. The 15 acre
Broughton Shopping Park site has the potential for more than
Broughton Shopping Park, Chester is owned by the 3 million sq ft of mixed use development
Hercules Unit Trust. Detailed planning consent has including office, retail, residential and
been granted to extend the existing 300,000 sq ft a new station. The opportunities for
shopping park by a further 140,000 sq ft. development are being reassessed in light
of the Government’s recent announcement
Whiteley Village in respect of a new high speed rail link (HS2)
Whiteley Village is located just two minutes from at Euston.
junction 9 of the M27 near Fareham, Hampshire.
The scheme is held by a 50% joint venture 95-99 Baker Street
between British Land and USS. Anchored by We have planning consent to refurbish
a Tesco superstore, detailed planning consent the residential and retail accommodation
has been obtained subject to completion of a at 95-99 Baker Street to deliver 19,000 sq ft
section 106 agreement, to redevelop the factory of residential and 6,200 sq ft of retail space
Other Information
outlet element to provide 242,000 sq ft of Open A1 to the market in early 2012.

retail accommodation with a further 77,500 sq ft
of ancillary uses.

JOINT VENTURES AND FUNDS
British Land’s net investment in funds and to large single asset concentrations, and attractive opportunities for our asset
joint ventures at 31 March 2010 is £1,594 increased our financial flexibility and capacity management to add value over time.
million (2009: £952 million). This investment to take new market opportunities as they arise.
The Tesco BL Holdings joint venture was
is principally in three funds and sixteen joint
In December 2009 we purchased a 50% renewed, extended and refinanced on
ventures, which hold in total £9.1 billion
interest in Shopping Centres Ltd, a joint the scheduled maturity date of the existing
(2009: £6.2 billion) of properties in retail,
venture with Tesco, which owns Surrey bank loan, with a new five-year loan facility.
offices and development projects. Our share
Quays Shopping Centre and Clifton Moor
of the property assets held in funds and BL Fraser Limited, the joint venture with
Retail Park, York, both anchored by Tesco
joint ventures accounted for 51.4% of the House of Fraser, sold all the department
superstores. These retail locations offer
total portfolio valuation at 31 March 2010. stores in its portfolio during 2009.
Each fund and joint venture is individually
financed; the total of £6.1 billion
Summary details of the principal joint ventures in which we have a 50% share are shown in the
(2009: £4.1 billion) of external debt is
table below.
without recourse to British Land. Portfolio
value Rent1 Finance
Joint ventures Joint venture JV partner £m £m £m
Joint ventures provide British Land with access Bluebutton Properties Ltd Blackstone Group 2,483 160 2,160
to desirable properties (often off-market) Broadgate, City offices L.P. funds
or introduce third party investors to assets MSC Property Intermediate Holdings Ltd LSP Green Park 1,271 77 832
we own, enabling us to create further Meadowhall, shopping centre, Sheffield Property Trust
opportunities. We benefit from working with BL Sainsbury Superstores Ltd J Sainsbury plc 1,188 66 678
a variety of partners with complementary 38 Sainsbury superstores,
1 Waitrose superstore
expertise and interests. Each joint venture is
Tesco BL Holdings Ltd Tesco plc 570 33 315
a separate entity for the purpose, controlled
2 retail parks, 2 shopping centres each
by a board carrying equal representation from anchored by Tesco, 5 Tesco superstores
each partner. The entities are able to raise Tesco Aqua Limited Partnership Tesco plc 575 30 487
finance on the strength of their assets, with no 21 Tesco superstores
recourse to the partners, thereby significantly BLT Properties Ltd Tesco plc 318 17 185
lowering the initial equity investments. 1 retail park, 8 Tesco superstores
The enterprise is shared by the partners, Shopping Centres Limited Tesco plc 184 11 119
over an agreed lifetime for the venture. 1 shopping centre, 1 retail park
Tesco British Land Property Partnership Tesco plc 107 7 45
Significant transactions during the year district shopping centre anchored by Tesco
since March 2009 included the formation The Scottish Retail Property Land Securities 195 14 119
in November 2009 of a strategic partnership Limited Partnership Group PLC
with Blackstone in respect of the 30 acre shopping centre, Aberdeen
City of London offices estate at Broadgate. Eurofund Investments Zaragoza SL Private Investors 125 4 70
The transaction brought together experienced Puerto Venecia, shopping scheme2, Spain and Copcisa Corp
investors to invest in and maintain Broadgate’s Whiteley Co-Ownership Universities 25 2 0
Fareham, factory outlet shopping centre Superannuation Scheme
status as the pre-eminent City office campus.
British Land is the asset manager and 1 Annualised rent.
administrator for this joint venture. Together 2 Development project.
with the establishment in early 2009 of the

joint venture in respect of the Meadowhall
Shopping Centre, this transaction realised
our strategic objective of reducing exposure
Our Business
£1,594 million 51.4%
Net investment in joint ventures and funds Share of joint ventures and funds
2009: £952 million in portfolio valuation
2009: 32.6%
Strategy in Action
Funds property adviser, and Schroder Property 10 retail warehouse parks and one shopping
The funds provide British Land with interests Managers (Jersey) Ltd is the Fund Manager. centre in Spain, France, Portugal and Italy.
in further properties in our key sectors. British
The Trust’s objective is to provide an annual During the year, following a vote by
Land acts as property advisor to the funds and
total return on the portfolio in excess of the unitholders, PREF’s duration was extended by
receives performance and management fees.
IPD Retail Warehouse Quarterly Universe three years to 2014. British Land funded PREF
excluding HUT over the life of the Trust. to permit the buyout of those unitholders who
Hercules Unit Trust (‘HUT’)
voted against extension, thereby increasing its
HUT is a Jersey based closed-ended property The strategy to achieve the outperformance
ownership of PREF from 35.2% to 65.3%.
unit trust with a fixed life which has been objective is to actively manage the properties
Performance Review
extended to 2020, and is subject to further with a view to optimising income and capital
Hercules Income Fund (‘HIF’)
extension with unitholder consent. HUT’s appreciation including disposal of the whole or
HIF is a Jersey based closed-ended property
primary investment focus is major retail any part of the properties in response to
unit trust with a fixed life to 2014, subject
warehouse or shopping park properties with changing market conditions.
to extension with unitholder consent. HIF’s
a value in excess of £20 million in the United
investment strategy is to acquire and own
Kingdom, and in particular, those properties Pillar Retail Europark Fund (‘PREF’)
retail warehouse assets with values between
that dominate their catchment area, offering a PREF is a Luxembourg based closed-ended
£3 million and £25 million throughout the
critical mass of retailing and, where possible, Fonds Commun de Placement with a fixed
United Kingdom where it is able to exploit
have the benefit of Open A1 planning consent. life which has been extended to 2014, and is
asset management opportunities. British
As at 31 March 2010 the Trust owned and subject to further extension with unitholder
Land is HIF’s property advisor, and Pillar
managed 21 retail warehouse and shopping consent. PREF’s aim is to acquire out-of-town
Governance
Property Management (Jersey) Ltd is the
parks together with one neighbourhood retail property in western Europe, and as at
Fund Manager.
shopping centre, providing in excess of 31 March 2010, PREF owned and managed
4.5 million sq ft. British Land is HUT’s
Value1 Rent2 Finance BL share

Fund £m £m £m %
Hercules Unit Trust (‘HUT’) 1,528 90 794 36.0

Pillar Retail Europark Fund (‘PREF’) 385 29 261 65.3
Hercules Income Fund (‘HIF’) 80 5 15 26.1
1 HUT share where assets are in joint arrangements.
2 Annualised rent.
Other Information

BUSINESS SUSTAINABILITY
At British Land, corporate responsibility is Natural resources

Global 100 Most a critical part of how we manage risks and We cannot afford, either financially or
Sustainable Corporations enhance value across our portfolio. We are environmentally, to be wasteful in our use of
2009, for the second achieving more through our partnership energy or water, or to send recyclable waste to
consecutive year approach to developing, managing and landfill. We need to reduce our exposure, and
financing property responsibly. that of our occupiers, to rising prices and more
Real Estate Sector Leader resource-related taxation, such as the CRC
The key material issues managed and
in Oekom Sustainability Energy Efficiency Scheme and landfill taxes.
monitored through our corporate responsibility
Review 2010 strategy are:
We also need to ensure that we are well
placed to deal with potential energy and
> Natural resources We aim to understand
water supply restrictions, and increasingly
and reduce resource use across our
stringent regulatory requirements, as well
portfolio, improving energy and water
We reduced energy use by 12% as anticipating growing demands from
efficiency and reducing waste to landfill.
across our like-for-like portfolio our investors, customers, employees and
> Customers We aim to treat our customers
compared to last year, saving an other stakeholders.
as partners, to help them to achieve their
estimated £700,000.
goals, and to help us to achieve ours. We have worked with our project teams
> Communities We aim to foster economic to implement our Sustainability Brief for
12%
regeneration and to demonstrate the Developments on all our major projects
highest standards of ethical behaviour since 2004. This year, we worked with our
in our dealings with communities and managing agents and environmental
the built environment. consultants to introduce a new Sustainability
Less energy use
> Staff and suppliers We aim to treat our Brief for Management across our retail
suppliers and staff as members of a single and office properties. We are pleased to
team who work together to ensure the report that our ongoing efforts are leading
Like-for-like energy use success of our business and delivery to significant improvements in efficiency
kWh million of service to our customers. across our portfolio.
Our corporate responsibility strategy was Medium-term targets

2009/10: 84.2 developed following a review of our activities, > Reduce managed energy use per m2 by
informed by stakeholder feedback, expert 20% by 2012, compared to 2009.
2008/09: 95.4 opinion and benchmarking. Independent > Achieve planning consent for a zero carbon
surveys were commissioned of our customers, commercial building by 2015.
managers, employees, suppliers, investors > Send zero managed waste to landfill from all
Offices Retail parks
and local communities, as well as Government our properties and developments by 2012.
officials and local authorities. > Reduce managed water use per m2 by 20%
Shopping centres Continental Europe
by 2015, compared to 2009.
The Board is updated on progress against our
British Land controlled energy use across our corporate responsibility targets each quarter
portfolio, comprising small power and lighting, as
and we publish performance data annually.
well as heating and cooling from the central plant.
Like-for-like properties are those that were in our www.britishland.com/crReport2010
managed portfolio both last year and this year,
comprising 66% of total British Land controlled
energy use this year.
Our Business
£50,000 82%
Energy savings at our Head Office Excellent or good
Occupier Satisfaction Survey 2009
Strategy in Action
Managed waste at our properties 2009/10 performance Customers
tonnes > 12% less energy use than last year across The enduring appeal of our real estate comes
our like-for-like portfolio, saving from meeting the needs of our customers,
2009/10: 13,366
11.1 million kWh of power and an estimated so that they choose to stay in our buildings
£700,000 on our occupiers’ energy bills, and recommend us to others. This increases
as well as over 4,675 tonnes of carbon. occupancy rates, maximises rental income
2008/09: 9,070
> 11,000 tonnes of waste recycled or and enhances property values. We continue to
re-used, equivalent to £445,000 in landfill address the issues identified by our occupiers,
taxes. We diverted 86% of waste from with delivering value for money remaining a
Performance Review
Recycled or re-used Landfilled landfill on our developments and 83% at key priority.
Incinerated our properties, through re-use, recycling
Medium-term target
and incineration.
Managed waste across our portfolio, with 47% > Achieve 80% customer satisfaction with
> 13% less water use than last year across
arising at our shopping centres this year, 34% at us and our managing agents by 2013.
our like-for-like portfolio, saving
our offices and 19% at our retail parks. 2008/09
figures were restated following a reporting error 54.7 million litres of water and an estimated 2009/10 performance
identified at one property. £70,000 on our occupiers’ water bills. > 82% of our UK occupiers rated us as good
> ALL BREEAM Excellent ratings for our or excellent in 2009, an impressive
new office developments, with our two turnaround from 40% in 2004 and a further
UK customers rating as good or excellent
residential schemes achieving Ecohomes improvement on 73% in 2007.
%
Excellent and Very Good ratings. > In 2010, we carried out our first independent
Governance
> For the second year, our carbon neutral customer survey in Continental Europe
Retail Office commitment covered energy use across and are responding to findings to improve
Communication the common parts of our entire multi-let service and satisfaction.
79% 74% managed portfolio. We purchased > £3 million forecast service charge
27% 32% £101,664 of carbon credits to offset savings for our occupiers with reductions
Responsiveness 20,769 tonnes of emissions. We also of 10% per m2 on average across our
66% 89% calculated our exposure to the Government’s retail portfolio and 0.2% across our
21% 23% new CRC Energy Efficiency Scheme. office portfolio.
Understanding needs > 27% better energy efficiency than current > Voted Landlord of the Year 2009 by UK
67% 63% standards, on average across our entire retailers, as well as Best Service Charge
23% 23% development portfolio. Provider for the second year running.
Feeling a valued customer > Carbon reduction partnerships with 30%
87% 90% of occupiers across our multi-let office
38% 38% portfolio, with our partnership at 201
Bishopsgate and The Broadgate Tower
Value for money (service charge)
33% 17% winning the Better Buildings Partnership’s
3% 14% Owner Occupier Award.
British Land Industry average
British Land results based on 50 independent

telephone interviews in early 2009. Industry
Other Information
average based on the Occupier Satisfaction

Survey 2009.

BUSINESS SUSTAINABILITY CONTINUED
Communities Community investment (£)

“ The new public realm in Every day we affect the lives of thousands 2009/10 2008/09
Regent’s Place is amazing of people across our portfolio. It makes sense
Cash donations £505,975 £548,785
and the new artwork is all for us to develop and manage properties
Staff time £40,941 £37,136
top quality. It has made a that meet local needs, as having vibrant
Supplier time £87,975 £134,281
communities around our properties makes
real difference to the area.” In-kind £81,983 £72,295
them more attractive to occupiers, helping
Jean Hurman to protect capital values and enhancing our Total investment £716,874 £792,497
Secretary to the Regent’s Park reputation. Local support is also an essential This data excludes mandatory contributions relating
Tenants Association part of the planning process, and it is something to planning. In-kind contributions are based on cost
rather than commercial value. The reduction in cash
that is earned over time, by listening to local
donations is largely due to our sustainability exhibition
people and responding to their needs, as well not running this year, following an investment of
27% of our Head Office team as by keeping our promises and building trust. £58,562 last year. 2008/09 figures were restated to
reflect improvements in data comprehensiveness.
volunteered, up from 24% last year. Next year, we will establish a methodology to
measure local satisfaction with British Land
as a developer. Staff
27%
Our people are essential to our long-term
Medium-term target success. To deliver our strategy we need to
> Set 2015 target for local satisfaction with attract and retain skilled and experienced
British Land as a developer. professionals who work effectively together
Volunteering
2009/10 performance in a small and focused team. Our business
> £717,000 investment in good causes, model is people light and asset heavy;
focusing on communities close to our we leverage the efforts, skill and judgement
properties and developments. We donated of a relatively small Head Office team over
£297,293 to UK charities (2009: £92,421). a large value of efficiently financed assets.
No contributions were made for political Our strategy and business approach are
purposes (2009:£nil). designed to emphasise the ‘human value
> £490,000 fundraising across our portfolio added’ to lift performance. This has proved
for good causes, thanks to the efforts and to be all the more important in the recent
generosity of our staff, suppliers, occupiers market conditions.
and shoppers across our portfolio. This We maintain a policy of employing the
was more than twice as much as last year. best candidates available in every position,
> £11.2 million contributed to local initiatives regardless of gender, ethnic group or
through the planning process. background. Applications for employment
> Business in the Community Big Tick by disabled persons are always fully
Awards 2010 for Education and Active considered, bearing in mind the aptitudes
Communities at The Source at Meadowhall. of the applicants concerned. In the event of
> Lord Mayor’s Dragon Awards 2009 for members of staff becoming disabled, every
British Land and Broadgate Estates. effort is made to ensure that their employment
with us continues and that appropriate training
is arranged. It is our policy that the training,
career development and promotion of
disabled persons should, as far as possible,
be identical to that of other employees.
Our Business
Platinum Gold
Service charge code Portfolio award 2009
Broughton Shopping Park near Chester Awarded by London’s Green 500
achieved the UK’s first Platinum Award
Strategy in Action
We encourage employee involvement In the absence of dispute, amounts due to
and keep our employees informed through trade and other suppliers are settled as
formal and informal briefings. We have well expeditiously as possible within their terms
established all-employee share schemes. of payment. As at 31 March 2010, there were
In the UK, separate pension fund reports 34 (2009: 32) suppliers’ days outstanding.
are made available to members.
2009/10 performance
Medium-term target > We signed up to the UK Government’s new
> Survey our Head Office staff and set 2015 Prompt Payment Code, monitoring how
Performance Review
target for staff satisfaction. quickly we make payments and identifying
opportunities to improve further.
2009/10 performance at Head Office
> Our managing agents achieved Gold
> All of our personnel participated in our new
Service Charge Code Awards or better
360º feedback process.
at all of our retail properties, audited by
> We provided our team with 672 training hours.
the Property Managers Association.
> 15% of our team worked flexibly, up from
9% last year.
Safety
> Staff turnover reduced to 9%, from 18%
We are committed to achieving the highest
last year.
standards of health and safety. We work
closely with our employees, managing agents
Suppliers
Governance
and contractors to manage and monitor
We recognise the importance of good supplier
health and safety at our properties and
relationships to the overall success of our
developments, protecting our employees,
business. We manage dealings with suppliers
suppliers, occupiers and other visitors.
in a fair, consistent and transparent manner.
Next year, we will participate in the Corporate
We manage our portfolio through managing Health and Safety Performance Index.
agents. This is both cost-efficient and effective,
enabling us to adapt the level of management Reportable accidents across our portfolio
provided, as appropriate, and respond quickly 2009/10 2008/09
to the purchase or sale of properties. We work
closely with our managing agents to deliver Amongst British Land staff – –
Amongst Broadgate
consistently high performance. Our office
Estates staff – –
portfolio is managed by Broadgate Estates,
At our managed properties 52 37
a wholly-owned subsidiary of British Land. Rate per 100,000 hours
Our retail portfolio is managed by Colliers worked on our developments 0.26 0.30
CRE, GVA Grimley, Montagu Evans, Munroe K,
Savills and the Smith Young Partnership.
We develop new buildings in partnership with

a team of specialists that includes architects,
engineers and building contractors, as well
as a wide range of sub-contractors. We work
with them to monitor and manage our impacts
Other Information
through an ISO:14001 certified Environmental

Management System.

VALUATION REPORT
> The valuers, on behalf of Knight Frank LLP, with the responsibility
for this report are Rupert Johnson BSc MRICS and Roger Norman
BSc (Hons) MRICS. Parts of the valuation have been undertaken
by additional valuers. We confirm that the valuers and additional
valuers collectively meet the requirements of RICS Valuation
The Directors Standards PS1.5 having sufficient current knowledge of the
The British Land Company PLC particular market and the skills and understanding to undertake
York House the valuations competently.
45 Seymour Street
London 3.0 Valuation
W1H 7LX 3.1 The Properties have been valued on the basis of Market Value
in accordance with the RICS Valuation Standards. This is an
13 April 2010
internationally recognised basis and is defined as:
Dear Sirs
“The estimated amount for which a property should exchange
The British Land Company PLC on the date of valuation between a willing buyer and a willing
Valuation as at 31 March 2010 seller in an arm’s-length transaction after proper marketing
wherein the parties had each acted knowledgeably, prudently
1.0 Basis of Instruction and without compulsion”.
1.1 In accordance with the terms of our appointment as External Valuers
3.2 No allowance has been made for expenses of realisation or for
to The British Land Company PLC, we have valued the freehold
any taxation which might arise, and our valuations are expressed
and leasehold properties detailed below, as at 31 March 2010, for
exclusive of any Value Added Tax that may become chargeable.
balance sheet purposes and inclusion in your financial accounts.
The properties are predominantly held for investment and in some 3.3 Our valuations reflect usual deductions in respect of purchaser’s
instances held for development or in the course of development or costs and, in particular, full liability for UK Stamp Duty as applicable
occupied by the Company. at the valuation date.
1.2 We have excluded from this Report those properties held by way 3.4 The properties have been valued individually and not as part
of joint ventures or through Limited Partnership arrangements. of a portfolio.
1.3 These valuations have been prepared in accordance with the RICS 3.5 We are of the opinion that the aggregate Market Value of
Valuation Standards, 6th Edition, issued by The Royal Institution of your interests in the properties, as at 31 March 2010, was
Chartered Surveyors. £4,135,869,320 (Four Billion One Hundred and Thirty Five Million
Eight Hundred and Sixty Nine Thousand Three Hundred and
2.0 Compliance and Independence Twenty Pounds).
2.1 We can confirm that:
The valuations are categorised as follows:
> Knight Frank LLP is appointed by The British Land Company PLC
Long Short Total
as External Valuers, as defined by the RICS Valuation Standards. Freehold leasehold leasehold value
> Knight Frank LLP was appointed in the role as valuer in September A) Held as
2005. These valuations have been undertaken under the overall investments/
supervision of the joint signatories, who have been responsible for owner occupied £3,793,169,320 £219,120,000 – £4,012,289,320
B) Held for
this instruction since that time. development £123,580,000 – – £123,580,000
> In relation to Knight Frank LLP’s preceding financial year, the C) In the course
proportion of the total fees paid by The British Land Company PLC of development – – – –
(‘the Company’) and its joint venture partners to the total fee Total value £3,916,749,320 £219,120,000 – £4,135,869,320
income of Knight Frank LLP was substantially less than 5%.
> We recognise and support the RICS Rules of Conduct and have
established procedures for identifying conflicts of interest.
Our Business
3.6 Certain properties are held on very long leases, for terms of 4.6 We have not carried out any investigation into past or present
approximately 999 years at fixed peppercorn or nominal rents. uses of either the properties or any neighbouring land to establish
Strategy in Action
For categorisation purposes these have been included in the whether there is any potential for contamination from these uses
freehold categories. Short leasehold properties are classified or sites to the subject properties. We understand that the
as having less than 50 years unexpired. Company has established procedures for the inspection of newly
acquired properties to be carried out with particular reference
3.7 The Valuer’s opinion of Market Values was primarily derived using
to environmental matters, and that any such matters identified
recent market transactions on arm’s-length terms, where available.
receive appropriate attention. Unless we have been provided with
information to the contrary, we have assumed that the properties
4.0 Valuation procedures and assumptions
are not, nor are likely to be, affected by land contamination and
4.1 The properties were inspected during the last 12 months.
that there are no ground conditions which would affect the present
4.2 As agreed, our valuations are based on measurements which or future uses of the properties.
have been provided by the Company and which were carried out
Performance Review
4.7 Our valuations assume that the properties would, in all respects,
in accordance with The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors
be insurable against all usual risks including terrorism, flooding
Code of Measuring Practice. In some cases the areas provided
and rising water table at normal, commercially acceptable premiums.
are as agreed with the tenants following rent review or letting.
4.8 For properties in the course of development, we have reflected the
4.3 Our valuations assume that the properties have good and
stage reached in construction and the costs remaining to be spent
marketable titles and are free of any undisclosed onerous burdens,
at the date of valuation. We have had regard to the contractual
outgoings or restrictions. We have not seen planning consents
liabilities of the parties involved in the developments and any cost
and, except where advised to the contrary, have assumed that
estimates that have been provided by professional advisors to the
the properties have been erected and are being occupied and
projects. For recently completed developments we have taken no
used in accordance with all requisite consents and that there
account of any retentions, nor made allowance for any outstanding
are no outstanding statutory notices.
development costs, fees, or other expenditure for which there may
Governance
As stated in our General Terms of Business for Valuations, we be a liability.
do not undertake searches or inspections of any kind (including
web based searches) for title or price paid information in any 5.0 General conditions
publicly available land registers, including the Land Registry 5.1 This report and our valuations therein have been prepared on the
for England & Wales, Registers of Scotland and Land & Property basis that there has been full disclosure of all relevant information
Services in Northern Ireland. and facts which may affect them.
4.4 We have not read all documents of title or leases and, for the 5.2 Our report and valuation is for the use only of the party to whom
purpose of our valuations, have accepted the details of tenure, it is addressed and no responsibility is accepted to any third party
tenancies and all other relevant information with which we have for the whole or any part of its contents. If our opinion of value is
been supplied by the Company. When considering the covenant disclosed to persons other than the addressees of this report, the
strength of individual tenants we have not carried out credit basis of valuation should be stated. If it is proposed to publish the
enquiries but have reflected in our valuations our general figure, the form and context in which the figure is to appear should
understanding of purchasers’ likely perceptions of tenants’ be approved by us beforehand.
financial status. We have, in addition, discussed with the
Company any bad debts or material arrears of rent and have Yours faithfully
considered this information in arriving at our valuations.
4.5 We were not instructed to carry out structural surveys of the
properties, nor to test the services, but have reflected in our
valuations, where necessary, any defects, items of disrepair
or outstanding works of alteration or improvement which we
R J S Johnson BSc MRICS R D Norman BSc (Hons) MRICS
noted during the course of our inspections or of which we have
Other Information
Partner Partner
been advised. Our valuations assume the buildings contain no
Commercial Valuations Commercial Valuations
deleterious materials and that the sites are unaffected by adverse
soil conditions, except where we have been notified to the contrary. For and on behalf of For and on behalf of
Knight Frank LLP Knight Frank LLP

BOARD OF DIRECTORS
1 2 3
4 5 6
7 8 9
10 11 12
13 14
66 The British Land Company PLC DIRECTORS’ REPORT: Governance

Our Business
s Member of the Executive Committee
n Member of the Audit Committee
l Member of the Remuneration Committee
u Member of the Nomination Committee
1 Chris Gibson-Smith (64) u 6 Charles Maudsley (45) s the Board of EMI Group in February 2004 when
Non-executive Chairman Head of Retail he also became Deputy Chairman and Senior
Strategy in Action
Chris Gibson-Smith joined British Land as a Charles Maudsley joined British Land and the Board in Independent Non-executive Director. In January 2007
non-executive director in January 2003 and was February 2010. He is responsible for the Group’s retail he was appointed Non-executive Chairman of EMI
appointed Non-executive Chairman in January 2007. businesses in the UK and Europe, for opportunistic Group which position he held until the UK music
He is Chairman of the London Stock Exchange, investments in the UK and Europe and for expanding the group’s purchase by private equity later in 2007.
a Governor of London Business School and a Company’s JV platform with international investors. Until February 2004, he was the Commercial &
non-executive director of Qatar Financial Centre He joined British Land from LaSalle Investment Trading Director of Tesco Plc. He joined Tesco
Authority. Formerly he was a Group Managing Management where he was Co-Head of Europe, in 1965 and became an executive director in 1984.
Director of BP p.l.c. and until 2005 he was Chairman Managing Director of the UK business, a member of He was also formerly Chairman of Gallaher Group
of National Air Traffic Services Limited and a the Management Board and an International Director. and a non-executive director of Lloyds TSB Bank Plc
non-executive director of Lloyds TSB Group plc, Prior to joining LaSalle he was with AXA Real Estate from 1994/97 and Vodafone Group from 1998/99.
and is a past Trustee of the Institute of Public Policy Investment Management for seven years where he
11 Aubrey Adams (60) n
Research and of Arts and Business. was Head of Real Estate Fund Management in the UK.
Non-executive Director
Performance Review
2 Chris Grigg (50) s 7 Robert Swannell (59) n u Aubrey Adams was appointed a non-executive
Chief Executive Senior Independent Non-executive Director director in September 2008. He was until May 2008
Chris Grigg joined British Land as Chief Executive Robert Swannell was appointed a non-executive Chief Executive of Savills PLC. He is Non-executive
in January 2009. He was Chief Executive of Barclays director of British Land in 1999. He is Chairman of Chairman of Air Partner PLC and was formerly
Commercial Bank until November 2008, having HMV Group plc and senior independent non-executive Senior Non-executive Director, Associated British
joined the bank in 2005 as Group Treasurer. Prior to director of 3i Group plc. Formerly Chairman of Citi’s Ports PLC. He is a non-executive director of Unitech
Barclays, he held a broad range of leadership positions European Investment Bank and Vice Chairman Citi Corporate Parks which is a business focused on
at Goldman Sachs, where his career spanned 20 years. Europe. He is also a member of the Takeover Panel Indian Real Estate Investment. He is Chairman of
He rose to partner of Goldman Sachs, working Appeal Board and a Trustee of Career Academies UK. Adventis Group plc and Chairman of Max Property
principally in its capital markets and derivatives Group plc. He is also a Trustee of the Wigmore Hall.
8 Lord Turnbull (65) n l u
business. He is a member of the Executive Board of
Non-executive Director 12 Dido Harding (42) l
EPRA, the European Public Real Estate Association.
Andrew Turnbull was appointed a non-executive Non-executive Director
Governance
3 Graham Roberts (51) s director of the Company in April 2006. He retired Dido Harding was appointed a non-executive director
Finance Director in July 2005 as Secretary of the Cabinet and Head of of the Company on 1 January 2010. She is Chief
Graham Roberts joined British Land in January 2002 the Home Civil Service, 2002/05. He was Permanent Executive Officer of TalkTalk Telecom Group PLC.
as an executive director and was appointed Finance Secretary of HM Treasury, 1998/04; and before Prior to this Dido was Sainsbury’s Convenience
Director in March 2002. Prior to joining British Land, that Permanent Secretary at the Department of Director and a member of J Sainsbury Plc’s
he spent eight years at Andersen, latterly as a partner the Environment, 1994/98. He entered the House Operating Board, having been appointed in March
specialising in real estate. He is a non-executive of Lords in 2005. He is a non-executive director 2008. She previously held senior management
director of Balfour Beatty plc. of Prudential PLC and Frontier Economics Ltd. positions within Tesco Plc, Kingfisher Plc and
He is Chairman of B H Global Limited. He is also Thomas Cook Ltd.
4 Tim Roberts (45) s
a part-time Adviser to the London Partners of
Head of Offices 13 Richard Pym (60) n
Booz & Co.
Tim Roberts joined British Land in 1997, was Non-executive Director
appointed to the Executive Committee in August 2005 9 Clive Cowdery (47) n Richard Pym was appointed a non-executive director
and elected as an executive director in July 2006. Non-executive Director of the Company on 1 January 2010. He is Chairman
At British Land he was appointed Joint Head of Asset Clive Cowdery was appointed a non-executive of Bradford & Bingley plc and of Northern Rock
Management in 2002 with responsibilities including director of the Company in May 2007. He is the (Asset Management) plc. He is also Non-executive
investment sales and purchases. He has founder of Resolution, a company formed in 2003 Chairman of BrightHouse and a non-executive
responsibility for the Office sector of the Company’s and was formerly the Chief Executive of Resolution director of Old Mutual plc. He was Group Chief
portfolio. Before joining British Land he was a partner Life Group Limited. He is also Chairman of the Executive of Alliance & Leicester plc until 2007.
at Drivers Jonas, in the Investment Agency team. charity, The Resolution Foundation. He was He was also formerly a Vice President of the British
previously Chairman and Chief Executive of Bankers Association, Non-executive Chairman
5 Stephen Smith (56) s
GE’s European primary insurance operations. of Halfords Group plc and a non-executive director
Chief Investment Officer
Before joining GE in 1998 he co-founded Scottish of Selfridges plc.
Stephen Smith joined the Board of the Company
Amicable/J. Rothschild International Assurance.
on 4 January 2010 and is Chief Investment Officer.
He was formerly Global Head of Asset Management 10 John Gildersleeve (65) l Secretary
Other Information
and Transactions at AXA Real Estate Investment Non-executive Director

Managers. Prior to joining AXA in 1999, he was John Gildersleeve was appointed a non-executive 14 Anthony Braine
Managing Director at Sun Life Properties for five years. director in September 2008. He is Chairman of
Honorary President
New Look PLC and Deputy Chairman of Carphone
Sir John Ritblat
Warehouse Group PLC, where he has been a
Sir John became Managing Director of British Land
non-executive director since 2000, and was also
in 1970 and Chairman in 1971. He retired from
appointed a non-executive director of TalkTalk
the Board in December 2006 and was appointed
Telecom Group PLC in January 2010. He joined
Honorary President.
DIRECTORS’ REPORT: Governance The British Land Company PLC 67

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
British Land fully recognises the fundamental

importance of Corporate Governance to
its business and is engaged in a process
of continuous improvement to achieve
the highest standards in this area.
Chris Gibson-Smith
Chairman
Statement of compliance with the Code to review and approve all major capital generally strongly positive. The Board’s goal
of Best Practice transactions. is for continuous improvement in the results
The Company has complied throughout the year on year.
The Chairman of the Board and individual
year with the Provisions of The Combined
directors meet regularly, outside formal The annual appraisal process also includes
Code on Corporate Governance 2008, other
Board meetings, as part of each director’s the Senior Independent Non-executive
than that, following Kate Swann’s departure
continuing contribution to delivery of the Director meeting to discuss the performance
on 10 July 2009, until Dido Harding’s appointment
Company’s strategy and superior returns of the Chairman with other directors annually,
on 1 January 2010, the Remuneration
for shareholders. This process also allows or more frequently as necessary. In addition,
Committee comprised two independent
for open two-way discussion about the the Chairman meets with each non-executive
non-executive directors rather than three.
effectiveness of the Board, its committees director annually to discuss their
and individual directors, both executive and contribution and the Chairman provides
Board effectiveness
non-executive. By this means the Chairman the Remuneration Committee with a
The Board is responsible for the strategy,
is continuously aware of the views of individual written appraisal of the Chief Executive’s
effective control and management of the
directors and can act as necessary to deal performance for the year. Similarly, the
Group. There is a written division of
with any issues relating to Board effectiveness Chief Executive provides the Remuneration
responsibilities at the head of the Company
before they can become a risk to the Company. Committee with a written assessment of the
between the Chairman and Chief Executive,
executive directors’ performance.
which has been approved by the Board. There is a strong and independent non-executive
There is a formal schedule of matters element on the Board as shown by the details
Committees of the Board
specifically reserved for Board approval, of directors on the Board of Directors page.
The Board has established Audit, Remuneration
which includes approval of the annual
and Nomination Committees which operate
and quarterly accounts, the approval of British Land Board performance evaluation
within defined terms of reference, which are
authority levels below the Board and material The British Land Board performance
made available on the Company’s website
acquisitions, disposals and financing evaluation alternates internally facilitated
www.britishland.com and their minutes
arrangements. The Board delegates authority appraisals with externally facilitated appraisals
are circulated to the Board. The Audit and
to the executive directors of the Company, in at appropriate intervals. This year the
Remuneration Committees are entirely
respect of certain transactions within defined, internally facilitated formal Board Appraisal
composed of independent non-executive
limited parameters. The Board has a regular process required each director to give detailed
directors. Robert Swannell is the Senior
schedule of meetings together with further input, the results of which were considered
Independent Non-executive Director.
meetings as required by the ongoing business by the Chairman, Senior Independent
of the Company. The executive directors and Non-executive Director and Board and
Nomination Committee
senior executives who comprise the Executive relevant consequential changes made.
The Nomination Committee’s responsibilities
Committee meet fortnightly, chaired by The appraisal covered, inter alia, the Board’s
include making recommendations to the
the Chief Executive, to deal with the ongoing role, corporate governance, executive
Board on all new Board appointments
management of the Group. In addition, the and non-executive directors’ contributions,
and succession planning. It consists of
Investment Committee, which comprises information flow and monitoring company
Chris Gibson-Smith, Lord Turnbull and
the executive directors, meets as required performance. The appraisal results were
Robert Swannell.

Our Business
Attendance at Board or Committee meetings during the year to 31 March 2010 > reviewing the Company’s internal financial
(where ‘–’ is shown, the director listed is not a member of the Committee) controls and the Company’s internal
Strategy in Action
Audit Remuneration Nomination
control and risk management systems;
Name Board Committee Committee Committee > monitoring and reviewing the effectiveness
Chris Gibson-Smith 9 – – 1 of the Company’s internal audit function;
Chris Grigg 9 – – – > making recommendations to the Board
Aubrey Adams 9 5 – – in relation to the appointment of the
Clive Cowdery 7 3 – – external auditor and approving the
Dido Harding1 2 – 1 – remuneration and terms of engagement
Andrew Jones2 4 – – – of the external auditor;
John Gildersleeve 8 – 5 – > reviewing and monitoring the external
Charles Maudsley3 3 – – – auditors independence, objectivity
Graham Roberts 8 – – –
and effectiveness;
Performance Review
Tim Roberts 9 – – –
> developing and implementing policy on
Richard Pym4 3 1 – –
the engagement of the external auditor
Stephen Smith5 3 – – –
Kate Swann6 1 – 2 – to supply non-audit services, taking
Robert Swannell 9 5 – 1 into account relevant ethical guidance;
Lord Turnbull 7 4 5 1 > reviewing and monitoring the valuation
process; and
No. of meetings during the year 9 5 5 1
> reviewing the Audit Committee terms
1 Three Board meetings held since Board appointment on 1 January 2010. One Remuneration Committee meeting held of reference and monitoring its execution.
since appointment to Committee on 1 January 2010.
2 Four Board meetings held during Board membership to 13 October 2009. The Audit Committee has undertaken each
3 Three Board meetings held since Board appointment on 1 February 2010.
of the above responsibilities during the year
4 Three Board meetings held since Board appointment on 1 January 2010. One Audit Committee meeting held since
Governance
appointment to Committee, on 1 January 2010. on which it has received and reviewed relevant
5 Three Board meetings held since Board appointment on 4 January 2010. reports from management, the valuers,
6 One Board meeting held during Board membership to 10 July 2009. Two Remuneration Committees held during
the internal and the external auditors. It has
Committee Membership to 10 July 2009.
agreed a schedule of internal audit reviews of
various of the Group’s processes and controls
to be undertaken, and has reviewed the
The Nomination Committee during the year Audit Committee
results of those reviews already completed.
has made recommendations to the Board The Audit Committee meets regularly during
on the appointment of two new executive the year aligned to the quarterly financial At the invitation of the Committee Chairman,
directors, Charles Maudsley and Stephen reporting timetable. During the financial year there are a number of regular attendees at
Smith and for two new non-executive it met on five occasions. It was chaired each meeting including the Chairman of the
directors, Dido Harding and Richard Pym. by Robert Swannell until 28 January 2010 Company, the Finance Director, the Head
The recommendations were made after and then by Richard Pym who was appointed of Financial Reporting, Head of Internal Audit
considering a wide range of candidates to the Committee on 1 January 2010. Robert and representatives of the valuers and
and employing external search consultants. Swannell continues to serve on the Committee external auditors. Other executives, including
It has also considered succession planning, and has been a member and a non-executive the Chief Executive, are invited to attend from
the structure, size and composition of director for 10 years bringing valuable time to time. The Committee meets regularly
the Board and its committees, the experience and knowledge. The other with the external auditors and Head of Internal
recommendations to the Board of directors Committee members are Clive Cowdery, Audit without management being present.
retiring by rotation for re-election by Lord Turnbull and Aubrey Adams, who have
Areas formally reviewed by the Committee
shareholders and the renewal of non- two, four and one years of experience on the
during the financial year included:
executive directors’ letters of appointment. Committee respectively. All are non-executive
> the Group’s key risks by priority and
directors. Richard Pym is the member with the
Other Information
their mitigations;
Remuneration policy and Committee most recent and relevant financial experience.
> an annual report on Internal Control;
Details of the Group remuneration policy The Committee’s responsibilities include:
> valuation processes, particularly with
and Committee are set out in the > monitoring the integrity of the financial
regard to the effect of market conditions
remuneration report. statements of the Company and any formal
announcements relating to the Company’s
financial performance;

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE CONTINUED
on the pricing of investment and > audit related services – the auditors are Non-executive directors
development properties. This included one of a number of firms providing audit The Board considers that Aubrey Adams,
valuer and internal property analyst related services, which include formal Clive Cowdery, John Gildersleeve, Dido
presentations to the Committee; reporting relating to borrowings, Harding, Richard Pym, Robert Swannell and
> monitoring of processes and procedures in shareholder and other circulars and Lord Turnbull are independent non-executive
place to ensure the Board is able effectively various other regulatory reports and work directors. In making this determination the
to assess borrowing covenant compliance in respect of acquisition and disposals. Board has considered whether each director
headroom and forecast sensitivity; Where they must carry out the work is independent in character and judgement
> the Group’s business exposure to bank because of their office or are best placed and whether there are relationships or
counterparties including syndicated and to do so, the auditors are selected. In other circumstances which are likely to affect,
bilateral loan facilities, deposits and circumstances the selection depends or could affect, the director’s judgement.
interest rate swap derivatives; on which firm is best suited; The Board believes that it is evident from
> tenant credit risk; > tax advisory – the auditors are one of a consideration of the non-executive directors’
> external auditors’ reports on planning, number of firms that provide tax advisory biographies detailed on the Board of Directors
conclusions and final opinion; services. The selection depends on who pages that they are of the integrity and stature
> external auditors’ management is best suited in the circumstances; and to perform their roles of independent
letters containing observations arising > general consulting – the auditors do not non-executive directors. In particular,
from the annual audit leading to provide general consultancy services the Board considers that Robert Swannell
recommendations for control or except in rare circumstances, and then remains independent although he has served
financial reporting improvement; only after consideration that they are best over 10 years on the Board. This was
> legal and professional fees paid; placed to provide the service and that their concluded after considering his integrity and
> treasury policy and processes independence and objectivity would not be the effectiveness with which he carries out his
including cash management, compromised. responsibilities to the Company. In addition, in
electronic payments and trades; a Board where many have joined the Company
Deloitte LLP have provided written
> corporation tax; recently, Robert Swannell provides a valuable
confirmation of their independence to the
> REIT compliance processes; continuity of knowledge and experience to the
Committee. Deloitte have also provided
> information systems security; benefit of the Company.
a report on the effectiveness of the external
> business continuity and disaster
audit process which covers audit objectives, The terms and conditions of appointment
recovery; and
leadership, qualification, quality and of non-executive directors are available
> capital expenditure approval and
independence. In addition, a performance for inspection at the Company’s registered
cost control.
evaluation questionnaire on Deloitte LLP was office and at the AGM.
completed by the Head of Internal Audit and
Auditors
presented to the Committee. The Committee Internal control
The Audit Committee meets with the external
and Board has recommended that the The directors are responsible for the
auditors to discuss with them the scope and
reappointment of Deloitte LLP be proposed maintenance of a sound system of internal
conclusions of their work.
to shareholders at the 2010 Annual control. The Board continues to apply the
The Committee is specifically charged under General Meeting. internal control provisions of The Combined
its terms of reference with considering Code on Corporate Governance (the Code)
The arrangements with auditors have been
matters relating to the audit appointment, the through a continuous process for identifying,
approved by the Audit Committee and are
independence and objectivity of the auditors, evaluating and managing the significant risks
regularly reviewed in the light of changing
and reviewing the results and effectiveness the Group faces. This process has been
requirements and best practice.
of the audit. Deloitte LLP were first appointed in place throughout the year, up to the date
external auditors of the Group in 2002. of approval of this report, and the Group
Rotation of directors
During the year, the Committee considered has been in compliance with the provisions
Under the Articles of Association of the
the appointment, compensation and set out in Section 1 of the Code. The Board is
Company, each director retires at the third
independence of the external auditors. responsible for the Group’s system of internal
Annual General Meeting (‘AGM’) after the
control and for reviewing its effectiveness.
With respect to other services provided by the general meeting at which he was last elected.
Such a system is designed to manage rather
auditors the following framework is in place:
than eliminate the risk of failure to achieve

Our Business
business objectives, and can only provide These risk reports are presented at the already completed. The Head of Internal
reasonable and not absolute assurance Audit Committee for oversight and discussion, Audit reports directly to the Audit Committee.
Strategy in Action
against material misstatement or loss. and influence the setting of the internal
A number of key business control procedures
audit programme.
The Group applies the following fundamental in property and accounting areas have been
control principles: The responsibility for management of each identified. An annual programme of audit
> a defined schedule of matters reserved individual risk is clearly identified and testing, performed by Internal Audit, has
for decision by the Board; delegated by the Board to specific executive been put in place to ensure these key controls
> a detailed authorisation process which directors and senior executives within the are working effectively throughout the period.
ensures that no material commitments Group. The executive directors also have close
are entered into without competent and involvement with the day-to-day operational Investor Relations
proper authorisation by more than one matters of the Group. The directors place considerable importance
approved executive; on maintaining open and clear communication
The principal risks are shown in the Our
Performance Review
> formal documentation of all significant with investors. The Company’s Investor
Business section on page 22.
transactions; Relations department is dedicated to
> a system of business and financial planning The reporting and discussion of risks to facilitating communication with shareholders.
including long-term cash flow and ensure effective risk management is further The Company has an ongoing programme
profitability forecasting and scenario supported by the presence of a solid of dialogue and meetings between the
exercises performed on major corporate, governance structure including committees executive directors and its shareholders,
property and financing proposals; of the Board (Investment Committee, where a wide range of relevant issues
> a property investment appraisal process; Audit Committee, Corporate Responsibility including strategy, performance, the market,
> monitoring against budget and forecast; Committee and the Derivatives Committee) management and governance are discussed
> continuous benchmarking of property which have well defined responsibilities and within the constraints of the information
performance with external sources such authorities. Clearly articulated policies help already known to the market. In addition,
Governance
as the Investment Property Databank (IPD); maintain consistent and regulated practices the Company undertakes regular roadshows
> a comprehensive property and corporate with regard to the key business functions, to the US, Europe and Japan and participates
insurance programme; and including development, investments and in sector conferences.
> a formal whistleblowing policy. treasury. Finally, extensive procedural
The directors consider it is important to
documents detail the range of operational
In compliance with the provisions of the Code, understand the views of shareholders, and at
level controls in place for the management
the Board continuously reviews the each scheduled Board meeting the directors
of risks associated with these transactions,
effectiveness of the Group’s system of internal receive a written report of the major issues
including billings and expense management.
control. The key risks that the Group faces and which have been raised with management.
features of the internal control system that The Group has a range of reports that assist Meetings are also held between shareholders
operated throughout the period covered by the management in understanding risks and and the Senior Independent Non-executive
accounts are described below: managing them appropriately. Semi-annually, Director and other non-executive directors,
risk reports are sent to executives and and the Company facilitates such meetings
Identification and evaluation of commercial directors that articulate the key business on request.
risks and related control objectives risks. Monthly management reports are
During the course of a year, shareholders
British Land undertakes a comprehensive prepared and circulated which include a
are kept informed of the progress of the
risk assessment semi-annually, which range of risk and performance indicators.
Company through results statements and
identifies the principal risks that affect the
other announcements that are released
Group. The resulting risk reports are reviewed Monitoring
through the London Stock Exchange and
by the Executive Committee of the Board. The Audit Committee meets regularly
other news services. Company announcements
The adequacy of risk mitigating strategies throughout the year and has reviewed
and presentations are made available
and controls are considered at each review. the Group’s internal controls. The Audit
simultaneously on our website, affording
This helps to assist in defining the risk profile Committee has agreed a schedule of internal
Other Information
all shareholders full access to material

of the business, the risk appetite and ensuring audit reviews of several of the Group’s
information. Shareholders can also raise
alignment to the business strategy. processes and controls to be undertaken,
questions directly with the Company at any
and has reviewed the results of those reviews
time through a facility on the website.

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE CONTINUED
Additionally, there is an opportunity at the

AGM for individual shareholders to question DIRECTORS’ RESPONSIBILITIES STATEMENT
the Chairman and the Chairmen of the Audit,
Remuneration and Nomination Committees.
The directors are responsible for preparing transactions, other events and conditions
At the meeting, the Company complies with
the Annual Report and the financial on the entity’s financial position and
the Code as it relates to voting, including votes
statements in accordance with applicable financial performance; and
withheld, the separation of resolutions, the
law and regulations. > make an assessment of the company’s
attendance of committee chairmen and voting
ability to continue as a going concern.
by poll. The Annual Report and Notice of Company law requires the directors to
Meeting are sent to shareholders at least prepare financial statements for each financial The directors are responsible for keeping
20 working days prior to the AGM. All AGM year. Under that law the directors are required adequate accounting records that are
resolutions are decided by poll and the voting to prepare the group financial statements sufficient to show and explain the company’s
results are announced to the London Stock in accordance with International Financial transactions and disclose with reasonable
Exchange and are available on the website Reporting Standards (IFRSs) as adopted accuracy at any time the financial position
and on request. by the European Union and Article 4 of the of the company and enable them to ensure
IAS Regulation and have elected to prepare that the financial statements comply with
Going concern the parent company financial statements the Companies Act 2006. They are also
The Group’s business activities, together in accordance with United Kingdom Generally responsible for safeguarding the assets of
with the factors likely to affect its future Accepted Accounting Practice (United Kingdom the company and hence for taking reasonable
development, performance and position Accounting Standards and applicable law). steps for the prevention and detection of fraud
are set out in the Directors’ Report and Under company law the directors must not and other irregularities.
Business Review. The financial position of approve the accounts unless they are satisfied
The directors are responsible for the
the Group, its cash flows, liquidity position that they give a true and fair view of the state
maintenance and integrity of the corporate
and borrowing facilities, together with the of affairs of the company and of the profit
and financial information included on the
Group’s financing policy, are described in or loss of the company for that period.
company’s website. Legislation in the United
the Financial Performance section of the
In preparing the parent company financial Kingdom governing the preparation and
Performance Review.
statements, the directors are required to: dissemination of financial statements may
The Group has considerable undrawn debt > select suitable accounting policies and differ from legislation in other jurisdictions.
facilities and cash deposits in excess of current then apply them consistently;
drawn banking facilities. There is substantial > make judgements and accounting We confirm that to the best of our knowledge:
headroom against the covenants for its estimates that are reasonable and prudent; > the financial statements, prepared in
unsecured banking facilities, details of which > state whether applicable UK Accounting accordance with the relevant financial
are included in the financing and cash flow Standards have been followed, subject reporting framework, give a true and
pages of the Business Review. It also benefits to any material departures disclosed and fair view of the assets, liabilities, financial
from a diverse and secure income stream explained in the financial statements; and position and profit or loss of the company
from leases with long average lease terms. > prepare the financial statements on the and the undertakings included in the
As a consequence, the directors believe going concern basis unless it is consolidation taken as a whole; and
that the Group is well placed to manage inappropriate to presume that the company > the management report, which is
its business risks satisfactorily despite will continue in business. incorporated into the directors’ report,
the current uncertain economic outlook. includes a fair review of the development
In preparing the group financial statements,
and performance of the business and the
The directors have a reasonable expectation International Accounting Standard 1 requires
position of the company and the
that the Company and the Group have that directors:
undertakings included in the consolidation
adequate resources to continue in operational > properly select and apply accounting policies;
taken as a whole, together with a
existence for the foreseeable future. Thus, > present information, including accounting
description of the principal risks and
they continue to adopt the going concern basis policies, in a manner that provides
uncertainties that they face.
in preparing the annual report and accounts. relevant, reliable, comparable and
understandable information; By order of the Board
> provide additional disclosures when
compliance with the specific requirements
in IFRSs are insufficient to enable users Graham Roberts
to understand the impact of particular Finance Director

Our Business
REMUNERATION REPORT
Unaudited information Directors’ remuneration packages comprise a fixed part consisting of

The Remuneration Committee comprises Lord Turnbull, Chairman a basic salary and benefits together with an annual incentive, matching
Strategy in Action
of the Committee, John Gildersleeve and Dido Harding. Dido Harding share plan and long-term incentive plans.
joined the Committee after joining the Company on 1 January 2010.
The total pay position is analysed by looking across each of the different
Kate Swann was a member of the Committee until resigning from
elements of pay: basic salary and benefits, annual incentive awards
the Board on 10 July 2009. The Committee’s Terms of Reference are
and long-term incentives. This provides the Committee with a total
available on the Company’s website.
remuneration view rather than just the competitiveness of the individual
The Remuneration Committee took advice during the year from pay elements and may vary widely to correspond to the need of the role
Strategic Remuneration, Chris Grigg, and Anthony Braine. and the performance delivered.
The Committee has retained Alan Judes as its independent adviser
In using salary and other remuneration data the Committee is mindful
throughout the year via his consultancy, Strategic Remuneration.
of not unnecessarily ratcheting up the remuneration levels, while
A copy of the letter of engagement between the Company and
properly incentivising performance and being able to attract and retain
Performance Review
Strategic Remuneration is on the Company’s website. Strategic
the best people. The Committee also has regard to economic factors,
Remuneration also gave advice to the Company on personnel and
remuneration trends and the level of pay increases throughout the
share plan matters. The Committee is satisfied that there is no conflict
Company when determining directors’ pay.
in Strategic Remuneration providing such services to the Company.
As advised in the Remuneration Report last year, our Chief Executive,
Statement of Company’s policy on directors’ remuneration who was appointed in January 2009, has reviewed the strategy of
British Land is an industry leader and a FTSE100 Company. The Company’s the Company. The Committee assessed its existing policy for annual
goal is to achieve sustained outperformance for shareholders. The and long-term incentive arrangements following that review and
business model is people light and asset heavy – it leverages the work, is making certain changes to the policy to ensure that it fully supports
skill and judgement of a relatively small staff over a large value of assets. the corporate strategy. None of those policy changes is of a nature
that requires a resolution to be put to a shareholder vote and there
To accomplish British Land’s performance goals the Company targets
Governance
are no increases to the quantum of remuneration for any person.
a high performance, open and meritocratic culture where people are
motivated individually and as a team to outperform competitors, subject The first change is to exclude executive directors from participating in
to maintenance of quality and security. the Fund Managers’ Performance Plan. It will be more collegiate if the
performance measure of the LTIP for all executive directors is fixed
It is important that pay policy reinforces the Company’s goals, providing
on the primary measure of NAV per share growth and that no Executive
effective incentives for exceptional Company, team and individual
Director participates in the Fund Managers’ Performance Plan.
performance with significant upward and downward variability.
The design of the Fund Managers’ Performance Plan which focuses
As well as providing motivation to perform, pay plays an important the asset managers on outperforming the IPD at the ungeared property
retention role and hence needs to be competitive with alternative level is appropriate for employees below the main Board level, and
employment opportunities. This is particularly so as British Land’s will remain in place for them. For those executive directors who were
demands on staff are high and there is a scarcity value on proven participants in the Fund Managers’ Performance Plan or may have
performers. We do recognise, however, that there are circumstances been invited to join it in the future for 2010/11 onwards, part of their
under which key staff members cannot be kept in the Company. Annual Incentive Plan targets will explicitly include a target for
outperforming the IPD at the ungeared property level. In this way we
It is even more important to have strong alignment of management
can retain the measurement and the focus on ungeared property
incentives with measures that matter to British Land’s shareholders
outperformance at Board level but inside our Annual Incentive Plan,
and with shareholder returns via share ownership.
part of which is deferred.
The policy is to set basic salary and benefits at norms broadly consistent
with the Company’s FTSE position with appropriate variance for specialist
positions, but to provide Annual Incentive and Long-Term Incentive
levels that would move total pay above median towards upper quartile
if performance so merits.
Other Information

REMUNERATION REPORT CONTINUED
The second change is to move away from the EPS measure that has (ii) Annual incentive plan
been used as a performance hurdle for one half of the awards under The annual incentive plan consists of an amount payable to directors
the Matching Share Plan. The forward strategy shifts the emphasis reflecting Company performance and the individual’s contribution
from being a pure industry expert to an investor. An Investment during the preceding year. One third of the annual incentive is paid in
Framework has been set within the Corporate Framework and fully vested shares subject to a three-year holding requirement under
disciplined metrics have been introduced to form investment/divestment the Company’s Matching Share Plan described below.
decisions. This approach to asset management may result in an
For 2010/11 the ‘On Target’ award level for the Chief Executive continues
intended decrease in EPS when the Company sells mature assets
to be 90% of salary with a maximum award of 180% of salary. ‘On Target’
and reinvests in assets with better growth prospects. Consequently,
award levels for the other executive directors are 75% of base salary
an EPS growth target may not be aligned with business strategy.
with a maximum of 150% of salary. The awards are not contractual and
The Committee has decided to replace the EPS measure with a
are not pensionable. These levels are unchanged from previous years.
Like-for-Like Growth of Rent measure. Like-for-like rental growth
is considered the most appropriate complementary target for the The Remuneration Committee’s approach to setting annual incentives
Matching Share Scheme. This will be measured over a three-year is two-fold. Each individual’s performance is considered in relation to
period and compared with similar metrics prepared by IPD. This the goals agreed for their specific areas of responsibility, such as:
measure is indicative of the underlying strength of the income stream > the success of purchases and sales;
of the Company reflecting the quality of investment decisions and asset > the value added from development activity;
management initiatives and can be measured over a three-year period. > lettings and rent reviews;
> asset management activities;
(i) Basic salary and benefits
> capital markets activities;
Basic salary and benefits in kind for each director are reviewed annually
> control over the Group’s finances and accounts; and
by the Remuneration Committee, taking account of the director’s
> management of administrative services and human resources.
performance and responsibilities.
The Committee also considers team contributions made by each
The Committee considers basic salary levels against two peer
individual to corporate performance, using as external indicators:
groups. For roles where corporate size and scope characteristics
> Accounting Return – total NAV based return plus dividends relative
drive duties, basic pay levels and recruitment sources, a peer group
to property majors and relevant indices;
of major UK companies across market sectors with a median market
> unlevered property returns relative to IPD;
capitalisation broadly comparable to British Land is used to establish
> rental growth from reviews and new lettings relative to ERV and
basic salary levels.
sector norms; and
For other posts, the Committee will look at pay levels in other > operating costs as a percentage of rents and assets against prior
organisations such as agents, fund managers or with comparably year and property majors.
sized support functions to match with roles of comparable speciality,
These factors are then aggregated by the Committee into annual
scope and responsibility to those within British Land. This reflects
incentive awards for each director on an individualised, non-formulaic
the ‘people light and asset heavy’ business model.
basis, though supported by the objective individual data points to
Basic salaries are targeted around the median of the relevant peer provide a fair and appropriate award to each individual.
group in both cases. The Company utilises pay surveys from time
to time to ensure pay is correctly positioned against the market.
Appropriate increases are made to base salary to reflect individual
merit and remain competitive with the market.

Our Business
The performance during the year ended 31 March 2010 was assessed Taking into account all these factors, the bonus was in aggregate for the
by the Committee using data available at the year end against the executive directors set at 61% of the maximum provided by the scheme
Strategy in Action
Company’s targets. The quantitative measures are: (50% in 2008/09).
> Accounting Return. This was well ahead of median.
> Unlevered property returns relative to IPD. Over the nine months to (iii) The Matching Share Plan
the calendar year end the Company outperformed the IPD at the The Matching Share Plan is targeted at Executive Committee members
all property level by 11.2% versus 10.8% and indeed the Company and, by invitation, other key senior contributors to the Company or
outperformed IPD over the 12 months to 31 March 2010 by 21.5% members of its Group. It is intended to incentivise and retain senior
versus 17.4%. executives, ensure that such executives are not focused exclusively
> EPS relative to prior year, forecast and other property majors. At the on short-term performance and, accordingly, increase the alignment
calendar year end British Land’s EPS reduction was less than all of their interests with those of the shareholders.
but one of its major comparator companies. EPS was forecast to
For those individuals who are eligible to participate in the Matching
be ahead of budget and better than median for peers for the year
Performance Review
Share Plan, one third of their after tax annual incentive or such other
as a whole. Nonetheless, EPS was down overall.
after tax proportion as the Committee may agree is delivered in
> Rental income growth above ERV and IPD. Rental income growth
British Land shares.
on a like-for-like basis was ahead of the IPD and key competitors.
> Operating costs as a percentage of rent and NAV compared with prior Participants are eligible to receive an award of free shares
year and property majors. Operating costs including property benchmarked by reference to the number of shares equal in value
outgoings as a proportion of gross rents were substantially below to the gross amount of their Deferred Annual Incentive on the date
the nearest competitor. Operating costs were approximately 1% such Deferred Annual Incentive was declared. The receipt of that
of portfolio value. award is subject to (i) the Annual Incentive Shares being held by
the Trustees for a three-year period, (ii) the participant remaining
The qualitative performance measures assessed by the Committee
an employee or officer of a Group company at the end of that time,
include the following:
and (iii) certain performance conditions being satisfied.
Governance
> Portfolio rebalancing. The Company completed the risk diversification
project selling half its Broadgate interest and creating a partnership The Matching Share Award is divided into two parts. One part is based
with Blackstone. Whilst short-term performance has been affected, on total shareholder return (the ‘TSR Part’). The other on the growth
the long-term benefit of reducing risk exposure and City weighting is in the Company’s Like-for-Like Growth of rent (the ‘LFL Part’).
expected to deliver value for shareholders over time. The partnership
The combined maximum amount of shares that can be delivered to a
with Blackstone is expected to enhance the Company’s ability to
participant pursuant to a Matching Share Award cannot exceed 200% of
maximise value.
the number of their Notional Annual Incentive Shares for any relevant year.
> Investment cycle. Some good progress has been made acquiring
assets which add value to the portfolio at Victoria Street, Surrey As regards the TSR Part, if the total shareholder return over the
Quays, Clifton Moor and Macclesfield. Our market view is that Performance Period is less than the median of a comparator group
there will be considerable opportunities going forward. of UK property companies, no Matching Share Award will vest for
> Developments. The London Office development programme has participants in relation to the TSR Part. If the TSR is equal to the
been brought to a safe conclusion. The whole programme, eight median, a Matching Share Award equal to 35% of each participant’s
buildings of 2.5 million sq ft in total, was delivered within 1% of the number of Notional Annual Incentive Shares vests in relation to the
budget of £995 million. The 2009 deliveries: Ropemaker, 10 Triton TSR Part. For every 1% that the TSR exceeds the median, each
Street and 20 Triton Street were delivered within 0.5% of the budget participant’s Matching Share Award in relation to the TSR Part is
forecast of £394 million. increased by an amount equal to 16.25% of that participant’s number
> Lettings. 77% of the 970,000 sq ft of office developments completed of Notional Annual Incentive Shares, subject to a maximum amount
in the year to 31 March 2010 have now been let resulting in 93% under the TSR Part equal to 100% of that participant’s number of
occupancy in the office portfolio. There is 99% occupancy in retail Notional Annual Incentive Shares.
and with only 0.6% of retail rents relating to tenants in administration,
The comparator group of UK property companies currently consists of
which is exceptional and due to the sales of more vulnerable sites
Great Portland Estates PLC, Hammerson PLC, Land Securities Group
Other Information
in past periods, but also to the alacrity with which deals have been
PLC, Liberty International PLC (to be appropriately modified following
achieved to fill up vacant space.
its demerger) and SEGRO plc.

As regards the LFL Part, if the increase in Like-for-Like Growth of rent The performance condition attaching to options and share awards
of the Company during the Performance Period is less than that of the measures the growth in the Company’s net asset value per share
IPD comparator (the ‘Growth Requirement’), no Matching Share Award against the capital growth component of the Investment Property
will vest for participants in relation to the LFL Part. If the increase in Databank Annual Index, over a performance period of three years
LFL is equal to the Growth Requirement, a Matching Share Award commencing the year in which the options and share awards are
equal to 35% of each participant’s number of Notional Annual Incentive granted. Growth in the Company’s net asset value per share must
Shares will vest in relation to the LFL Part. For every 0.5% per annum exceed that of the Index for a minimum proportion of the options
that the LFL exceeds the Growth Requirement, each participant’s to be exercised and/or performance shares to vest. Stretching
Matching Share Award in relation to the LFL Part shall be increased outperformance is required for the entire award to vest. Growth
by an amount equal to 21.67% of that participant’s number of Notional in the Company’s net asset value per share is a key measure of
Annual Incentive Shares, subject to a maximum amount under the performance over the longer term and highly relevant for LTIP
LFL Part equal to 100% of that participant’s number of Notional Annual performance measurement.
Incentive Shares.
The performance hurdles for directors’ LTIP awards are:
The TSR and LFL conditions have been selected to complement the Percentage by which the average annual growth of
British Land’s Net Asset Value per Share exceeds the
net asset based LTIP vesting criteria and ensure a balanced alignment average annual increase in the capital growth component
of interest with the key financial measures most used by shareholders. of the Investment Property Databank Annual Index Percentage vesting
The vesting scales have been designed to reward outperformance – 4.5% or more 100%
in the case of TSR, by reference to competitors – in the case of LFL, 3.5% or more but less than 4.5% 80%
by reference to our comparative outperformance as measured by IPD. 2.5% or more but less than 3.5% 60%
They are fully supportive of the strategy of the Company. 1.5% or more but less than 2.5% 40%
0.5% or more but less than 1.5% 20%
Hewitt Associates undertakes the TSR performance measurement more than 0% but less than 0.5% 10%
and submits a report to the Company advising the results for each 0% or less 0%
specific award. The Committee requests external adviser sign-off
for performance measures as part of its oversight procedures. The Committee reviews these performance conditions on a regular
basis to ensure they are both sufficiently stretching and remain relevant
(iv) Long-Term Incentive Plan (‘LTIP’) to the Company’s strategic objectives. Hewitt Associates undertakes
The LTIP permits the award of market value options and/or performance the performance measurement and submits a report to the Company
shares, as may suit the Company from time to time. The option section advising the results for each specific award.
of the Plan comprises an Inland Revenue approved part and an
unapproved part. Under the Plan, the Company may award a maximum (v) Fund Managers Performance Plan
notional value of 250% of base salary in performance shares each year The Performance Plan is designed to incentivise executives who
or the equivalent value of base salary in options each year (the latter operate the ‘Company advised’ Unit Trusts and the British Land owned
under current estimations being valued at 25% of their exercise price). portfolios. The Performance Plan is intended to incentivise and retain
The annual limit is set with both the options and performance shares the fund managers by rewarding outperformance and to align the
components of the Plan taken together. The split of the awards made interests of those executives with investors in the Unit Trusts and the
each year between performance shares and options may be varied Company. The Company is one of the largest investors in those Unit
between 0% and 100% at the discretion of the Remuneration Committee. Trusts. As explained earlier, executive directors will no longer
The Remuneration Committee’s current policy is to make awards of participate in this plan.
up to a maximum of 200% of salary for executive directors and 250%
of salary for the Chief Executive. Following the end of each financial measurement period, up to a
maximum of 30% of the performance fees earned by the Unit Trusts
Grants made under the Plan are subject to a prescribed performance is set aside to provide incentives under the Performance Plan
condition upon which the exercise of options and the vesting of (the ‘Incentive Pool’). As agreed with shareholders in 2008, an annual
performance shares will be contingent except that grants may be comparative notional pool is also calculated for the purposes of
made without any performance condition if required to facilitate the incentivising executives managing internal portfolios. At present, the
recruitment of a new executive. Committee only expects awards to be made up to or less than 25%
of the performance fees/notional pool. The Committee may in its
absolute discretion grant, and recommend that the Trustees grant,
awards under the Performance Plan.

Our Business
Some 20% of the value of any award under the Performance Plan is Plan holding, Matching Shares purchased with bonus and Share
paid as a cash bonus. The remaining 80% of the value of any award is Incentive Plan holdings. Shown below is the guideline fixed for the
Strategy in Action
delivered in the form of free shares in the Company (the ‘Share Award’). year to 31 March 2011:
Holding at
The Share Award vests in three equal annual tranches. The first Guideline 31 March
tranche vests, and the shares comprised in that tranche are delivered, holding 2010
on the first anniversary of the award date. The second and third Chris Grigg 332,572 545,145
tranches vest, and the shares comprised in those tranches are Charles Maudsley 110,425 225,697
delivered, annually thereafter. No further performance conditions need Graham Roberts 121,597 236,704
to be satisfied in order for a Share Award to vest. However, to the extent Tim Roberts 110,425 125,436
that performance fees (by reference to which the Incentive Pool or Stephen Smith 110,425 88,543
notional incentive pool was calculated) are ‘clawed back’ due to
subsequent Fund underperformance, a pro rata proportion of all Fixed/variable pay analysis
unvested awards for that year cease to vest. In addition, each tranche
Performance Review
The following summarises the annual package and relative importance
of a Share Award will normally only vest if the recipient of that Share of its components for each executive director. The analysis prepared
Award is an employee or officer of a Group company on the relevant by Strategic Remuneration shows the estimated ‘expected’ value
vesting date and has not given notice of intention to resign. of variable compensation. This takes account of vesting periods and
In general, no single award under the Performance Plan will represent related performance conditions.
more than 25% of the Incentive Pool. However, the Committee may in
its absolute discretion grant, and recommend that the Trustees grant, Distribution of total ‘On Target’ Annual Remuneration
%
awards with a higher value. In addition, the Committee may in its
absolute discretion make, and recommend that the Trustees make,
awards to employees who work outside of the fund management 0 20 40 60 80 100
group. Such awards would be based on contribution to fund activity Chris Grigg
Governance
and would represent, in total, no more than 20% of the Incentive Pool. Charles Maudsley
It is important that Performance Plan recipients also remain focused Graham Roberts
on the Company’s overall performance, and indeed many of them have Tim Roberts
broader responsibilities in that regard. They therefore remain eligible
Stephen Smith
for the Company’s other share-based award schemes. However, in
line with practice at other companies and in order to avoid excessive
Salary Matching Shares
overall awards, the combined value of awards in any year for a
participant under both the Performance Plan and the LTIP will be the Pension Long-Term Incentives
higher of (i) the value of their Performance Plan award plus an award Annual Incentive
equal to 20% of what would otherwise have been the value of their
LTIP award, and (ii) 100% of the value of their LTIP award, or such
Distribution of total maximum Annual Remuneration
other combined value as the Committee may determine in its absolute %
discretion from time to time.
0 20 40 60 80 100
Minimum Shareholding Guideline
The director’s Minimum Shareholding Guideline requires approximately Chris Grigg
200% of base salary to be held in vested shares by the Chief Executive Charles Maudsley
and 125% for other executive directors. There is no set timescale Graham Roberts
required to reach the target but this should be achieved through
Tim Roberts
the regular additions anticipated by Annual Incentive and Long-Term
Incentive Plan awards. No purchases are required either to reach the Stephen Smith
level or to respond to share price falls but directors are expected to
Other Information
increase their holding of shares each year until the target is attained. Salary Matching Shares
The number/value of shares required as the target is fixed once a Pension Long-Term Incentives
year. Shares included are those beneficially owned, Chris Grigg’s Annual Incentive
Co‑Investment Plan holding, Charles Maudsley’s Restricted Share

Performance graph Directors’ contracts

The graph below is prepared in accordance with the Directors’ The policy of the Company is to have service contracts with notice
Remuneration Report Regulations 2002. It shows the Company’s total periods of one year. It is sometimes necessary when recruiting a new
return for the five years from 1 April 2005 to 31 March 2010 against director to give a service contract with an initial term of longer than
that of the FTSE Real Estate Sector Total Return Index from 1 April 2005 one year. In such circumstances it is the policy of the Company that the
to 31 March 2006 and against that of the FTSE Real Estate Investment notice period should reduce to one year after an initial period of service.
Trusts Total Return Index from 1 April 2006 to 31 March 2010.
The Company applies the principle of mitigation in the event of early
FTSE reclassified their Real Estate Sector into two component termination of service contracts.
Sectors during 2009, namely; FTSE Real Estate Investment Trusts
Chris Grigg has a service contract dated 19 December 2008, Charles
(REITS) and FTSE Real Estate Investment Services (REIS). British Land
Maudsley has a service contract dated 3 November 2009, Graham
is a constituent of the FTSE REITS Sector. This is a more accurate peer
Roberts has a service contract dated 19 November 2001, Tim Roberts
group as it consists of companies whose businesses are better aligned
has a service contract dated 14 November 2006, and Stephen Smith
than the previous FTSE Real Estate Sector. The process of the
has a service contract dated 3 November 2009, all of which provide
Sector split by FTSE included a back calculation of the new Sector’s
for one year’s notice.
performance, this has gone back as far as 31 March 2006. Therefore,
we are able to show a more comparable Sector/Peer group from Andrew Jones had a contract dated 17 April 2007 which provided for
April 2006 on the chart below. Hewitt Associates prepared the graph one year’s notice. All of his entitlements to outstanding share awards
based on underlying data provided by Datastream. and options lapsed on his departure.
There are no further provisions for compensation payable on

The British Land Company PLC Total Return Index vs. FTSE Real Estate termination of service contracts of directors. There has been no
Sector Total Return Index for the period 1 April 2005 to 31 March 2006 compensation paid to departing directors during the year.
and FTSE REITs sector for the period 1 April 2006 to 31 March 2010
(rebased as at 1 April 2005)
Executive directors’ fees
Apr 05 Apr 06 Apr 07 Apr 08 Apr 09 Mar 10 Graham Roberts was appointed a non-executive director of Balfour
250 Beatty PLC on 1 January 2009. Graham Roberts retains his Balfour
Beatty remuneration of £56,000.
200
150 Non-executive directors

100 The remuneration of the non-executive directors is a matter for the
executive members of the Board. Their remuneration comprises
50 a standard director’s fee, a fee for additional responsibilities and
0 an attendance fee based on the number of meetings attended during
the year. The remuneration provided takes into account the level of
The British Land Company PLC responsibility, experience and abilities required and the marketplace
FTSE REITS Sector (Apr 06 – Mar 10) for similar positions in comparable companies.
FTSE Real Estate Sector (Apr 05 – Mar 06)

Our Business
Audited information
Directors’ emoluments
Strategy in Action
2010 2009
Total Total
Annual (excluding Annual (excluding
Salary1 incentive7 Benefits pensions) Salary incentive Benefits pensions)
£ £ £ £ £ £ £ £
Chairman
Chris Gibson-Smith 348,958 348,958 397,826 397,826
Executive directors
Chris Grigg 800,000 960,000 18,777 1,778,777 178,787 178,787 5,747 363,321
Charles Maudsley 70,833 53,125 2,783 126,7412
Graham Roberts 469,500 351,000 17,591 838,091 391,500 240,000 27,536 659,036
Tim Roberts 401,500 400,000 18,147 819,647 401,500 310,000 23,595 735,095
Performance Review
Stephen Smith 104,564 78,422 4,607 187,5933
Andrew Jones 226,989 9,954 236,9434 425,000 350,000 20,244 795,244
Fees Total Fees Total

£ £ £ £
Non-executive directors
Aubrey Adams 70,200 70,200 33,167 33,167
Clive Cowdery 61,800 61,800 55,330 55,330
John Gildersleeve 66,200 66,200 34,817 34,817
Dido Harding 14,750 14,7505
Richard Pym 19,253 19,2535
Robert Swannell 85,997 85,997 95,415 95,415
Governance
Kate Swann 15,750 15,7506 61,330 61,330
Lord Turnbull 78,900 78,900 93,618 93,618
2,835,194 1,842,547 71,859 4,749,600 2,168,290 1,078,787 77,122 3,324,199
1 Includes £1,500 to each of Graham Roberts and Tim Roberts for subsidiary board fees.
2 From 1 February 2010, date of appointment to office.
3 From 4 January 2010, date of appointment to office.
4 To 13 October 2009, date of cessation of office. Andrew Jones continued in employment until 19th January 2010, in which time he was paid £134,936 in basic salary and received
£4,998 in benefits.
6 To 10 July 2009, date of cessation of office.
7 One third of the annual bonus is paid in the form of locked up shares under the Matching Share Plan.
Emoluments do not include distributions arising from share plan interests. Benefits in kind include car allowance, private medical insurance
and permanent health insurance. Pension related payments to Chris Grigg, Charles Maudsley, Graham Roberts, Tim Roberts, Stephen Smith
and Andrew Jones are shown in the directors’ pension benefits for the year ended 31 March 2010 on page 84.
Salaries are benchmarked against comparative data in salary surveys to set a level of around the median in accordance with the remuneration
policy of the Committee. The Committee reviews salaries annually at 1 April. Shown below are the current annual rates of salary of the executive
directors with effect from 1 April 2010.
2010 2009 % increase
Chris Grigg £800,000 £800,000 0%

Charles Maudsley £425,000 £425,000 0%
Graham Roberts £468,000 £468,000 0%
Tim Roberts £425,000 £400,000 6.25%
Other Information
Stephen Smith £425,000 £425,000 0%

a) Directors’ interests in the Company’s shares

Fully paid ordinary shares, including shares held by spouses, Matching Share Plan Bonus Shares and under the Company’s Share Incentive Plan.
All interests are beneficial.
31 March 1 April
2010 2009
Chris Gibson-Smith 53,201 53,201

Chris Grigg 302,645 242,500
Charles Maudsley 55,695 53,5171
Graham Roberts 236,704 232,636
Tim Roberts 125,436 83,856
Stephen Smith 88,543 –2
Andrew Jones 115,3113 99,281
Aubrey Adams 20,000 20,000
Clive Cowdery 19,540 10,066
John Gildersleeve 5,071 5,000
Dido Harding – –4
Richard Pym – –4
Kate Swann 4,2935 4,293
Robert Swannell 19,933 13,056
Lord Turnbull 8,196 5,285
1 From 1 February 2010, date of appointment to office.
3 To 13 October 2009, date of cessation of office.
5 To 10 July 2009, date of cessation of office.
On 14 April 2010 Graham Roberts and Tim Roberts each purchased 26 shares at a price of 486.7p per share under the ‘Partnership’ element
of the Company’s Share Incentive Plan. Accordingly, they were awarded 52 ‘Matching’ ordinary shares, all at a price of 486.7p per share.
On 14 May 2010 Graham Roberts and Tim Roberts each purchased 29 shares at a price of 430.5p per share under the ‘Partnership’ element of
the Company’s Share Incentive Plan. Accordingly, they were each awarded 58 ‘Matching’ ordinary shares, at a price of 430.5p per share. 119 shares
at a price of 430.5p were also awarded under the ‘Dividend’ element of the Plan.
The aggregate amount of gains made by directors on the exercise of share options was £nil (2009: £nil). The aggregate value of distributions
to directors in relation to the long-term incentive plans (not including option exercises) was £745,238 (2009: £1,192,617).
The MMQ for the ordinary 25p shares of the Company at the close of business on 31 March 2010 was 481.1p. The highest and lowest MMQs during
the year to 31 March 2010 were 528p and 355.5p.
b) Directors’ options and share plan interests

(i) Sharesave Scheme
Beneficial interests of the directors under the Sharesave Scheme:
No of options No of options No of options No of options
No of options granted vesting exercised lapsed No of options Exercise Earliest
Date of at during during during during at price exercise Expiry
grant 01.04.09 the year the year the year the year 31.03.10 (p) date date
Graham Roberts 22.12.04 3,077 3,0771 3,0771 537 01.03.10 31.08.10

Tim Roberts 22.12.04 615 6152 537 01.03.10 31.08.10
30.06.08 1,454 1,4542 517 01.09.11 28.02.12
30.06.09 2,411 2,411 301 01.09.12 28.02.13
30.06.09 1,033 1,033 301 01.09.14 28.02.15
Andrew Jones 22.12.05 1,402 1,4023 666 01.03.09 31.08.09
1 On 1 March 2010 the 3,077 options awarded to Graham Roberts vested at the end of the five year savings period.
2 On 16 June 2009 Tim Roberts withdrew from the 22.12.04 and 30.06.08 schemes, forfeiting the options under the schemes.
3 On 1 March 2009 the 1,402 options awarded to Andrew Jones vested but were not exercised and expired on 31 August 2009. He ceased to be a director on 13 October 2009, at which
time he held no interests under the Sharesave Scheme.
The directors’ participation in the Sharesave Scheme, which is not subject to performance criteria, is considered appropriate because the Scheme
is open to all employees with 18 months of service.

Our Business
(ii) Long-Term Incentive Plan
Beneficial interests of the directors under the Long-Term Incentive Plan:
Strategy in Action
Options
No of options No of options No of options No of options
No of options granted vesting exercised lapsed No of options Exercise Earliest
Date of at during during during during at price exercise Expiry
grant 01.04.091 the year the year the year the year 31.03.10 (p) date date
Chris Grigg 29.06.2009 1,033,591 1,033,591 387 29.06.12 28.06.19

Graham Roberts 25.09.2003 119,455 119,455 416 25.09.06 24.09.13
28.05.2004 122,872 122,872 549 28.05.07 27.05.14
31.05.2005 81,743 81,743 727 31.05.08 30.05.15
30.05.2006 78,081 78,0812 1,037 30.05.09 29.05.16
14.07.2006 26,026 26,0263 1,090 14.07.09 13.07.16
Performance Review
27.06.2007 102,317 102,317 1,100 27.06.10 26.06.17
20.12.2007 51,254 51,254 732 20.12.10 19.12.17
29.05.2008 154,553 154,553 666 29.05.11 28.05.18
29.06.2009 483,720 483,720 387 29.06.12 28.06.19
Tim Roberts 29.11.2004 22,513 22,513 660 29.11.07 29.11.14
31.05.2005 13,210 13,210 727 31.05.08 30.05.15
05.12.2005 17,483 17,483 824 05.12.08 04.12.15
30.05.2006 52,053 52,0532 1,037 30.05.09 29.05.16
14.07.2006 17,350 17,3503 1,090 14.07.09 13.07.16
27.06.2007 19,099 19,099 1,100 27.06.10 26.06.17
20.12.2007 9,566 9,566 732 20.12.10 19.12.17
29.05.2008 240,177 240,177 666 29.05.11 28.05.18
Governance
29.06.2009 826,873 826,873 387 29.06.12 28.06.19
Andrew Jones 05.12.2005 6,553 6,5534 824 05.12.08 04.12.15
30.05.2006 12,579 12,5792 1,037 30.05.09 29.05.16
14.07.2006 4,192 4,1923 1,090 14.07.09 13.07.16
20.12.2007 40,060 40,0604 732 20.12.10 19.12.17
29.05.2008 255,188 255,1885 666 29.05.11 28.05.18
26.06.2009 878,552 878,5524 387 29.06.12 29.06.19
1 The number of options as at 1 April 2009 are the maximum awards achievable under the Long-Term Incentive Plan on maximum outperformance of the Plan’s performance
conditions except for the options awarded in 2003, 2004 and 2005 which have already vested and remain exercisable until their respective expiry dates.
2 These options were forfeited on 30 May 2009 as the Performance Target had not been met.
3 These options were forfeited on 14 July 2009 as the Performance Target had not been met.
4 These options were forfeited on leaving employment on 19 January 2010. He had ceased to be a director on 13 October 2009.
5 204,151 of these options lapsed on 21 May 2009, when Andrew Jones was made a Fund Managers Performance Plan award (see page 77). The remaining 51,037 options were
forfeited on leaving employment on 19 January 2010. He had ceased to be a director on 13 October 2009.
Other Information

Performance Shares
No of shares No of shares No of shares
No of shares granted vesting forfeited No of shares Earliest
Date of at during during during at vesting
grant 01.04.091 this year2 this year this year 31.03.10 date
Chris Grigg 29.06.2009 258,397 258,397 29.06.2012

Graham Roberts 30.05.2006 26,026 26,026 3
30.05.2009
27.06.2007 25,578 25,578 27.06.2010
20.12.2007 12,813 12,813 20.12.2010
29.05.2008 78,448 78,448 29.05.2011
29.06.2009 120,930 120,930 29.06.2012
Tim Roberts 30.05.2006 17,350 17,3503 30.05.2009
27.06.2007 4,774 4,774 27.06.2010
20.12.2007 2,390 2,390 20.12.2010
29.05.2008 60,044 60,044 29.05.2011
Andrew Jones 30.05.2006 4,192 4,1923 30.05.2009
27.06.2007 39,985 39,9854 27.06.2010
20.12.2007 10,014 10,0144 20.12.2010
29.05.2008 63,796 63,7965 29.05.2011
1 The numbers of shares as at 1 April 2009 are the maximum awards achievable under the Long-Term Incentive Plan on maximum outperformance of the Plan’s performance conditions.
2 On 29 June 2009, the date of grant, the market price was 389p.
3 These shares were forfeited on 30 May 2009 as the Performance Target had not been met.
4 These shares were forfeited on leaving employment on 19 January 2010. He had ceased to be a director on 13 October 2009.
5 51,037 of these share lapsed on 21 May 2009, when Andrew Jones was made a Fund Managers Performance Plan award (see page 77). The remaining 12,759 shares were forfeited
on leaving employment on 19 January 2010. He had ceased to be a director on 13 October 2009.
The LTIP performance target compares British Land’s average annual Net Asset Value Growth over three years to the capital growth component
of the Investment Property Databank Annual Index (see page 76 of the remuneration report).
(iii) Chris Grigg 2009 Co-Investment Share Plan

In connection with the recruitment of Chris Grigg, as Chief Executive of the Company, the need for which arose as a result of Stephen Hester’s
move to take on the role of Chief Executive at The Royal Bank of Scotland, the Company made him a one-off non-pensionable award of 242,500
British Land shares on 4 March 2009. The market price on that day was £3.305. This award was conditional on the acquisition by him, on the same
day, of a matching number of shares and requires the subsequent retention of those shares until 12 January 2012. These shares conditionally vest
on 12 January 2012 provided he remains in employment at that time.
(iv) Charles Maudsley 2010 Co-Investment Share Plan & Restricted Share Plan
In connection with the recruitment of Charles Maudsley as an executive director, the Company made him a one-off non-pensionable award
of 53,517 British Land shares on 30 March 2010 under the Charles Maudsley 2010 Co-Investment Share Plan. The market price on that day
was £4.785. This award was conditional on the acquisition by him of a matching number of shares and requires the retention of those shares
until 1 February 2013. These shares conditionally vest on 1 February 2013, subject to remaining in employment until then and the performance
conditions; 50% will vest if there is real growth in NAV per share over the performance period and 50% will vest if total return is over 10% for
the performance period. The performance period is the three years to 31 December 2012.
The Company also made a further one-off non-pensionable award to him of 170,002 British Land shares on 30 March 2010 under the Charles
Maudsley 2010 Restricted Share Plan. The market price on that day was £4.785. The award was made as compensation for earned but unvested
deferred shares and cash awards at his previous employer. An appropriate discount for uncertainty of future share price and currency values was
used to value the level of compensation. 116,877 of these shares will vest on 1 February 2011 and the remaining 53,125 on 1 February 2012, subject
to remaining in employment at these dates.
(v) Stephen Smith 2010 Co-Investment Share Plan

In connection with the recruitment of Stephen Smith as an executive director, the Company made him a one-off non-pensionable grant of 85,328
British Land shares on 31 March 2010 under the Stephen Smith Co-Investment Share Plan. The market price on that day was £4.811. This grant
was conditional on the acquisition by him of a matching number of shares and requires the retention of those shares until 4 January 2013. These
shares conditionally vest on 4 January 2013, subject to remaining in employment until then and the performance conditions; 50% will vest if there
is real growth in NAV per share over the performance period and 50% will vest if total return is over 10% for the performance period. The performance
period is the three years to 31 December 2012.

Our Business
(vi) Matching Share Plan
No of No of No of
Strategy in Action
No of matching matching matching No of
matching shares shares shares matching
shares awarded vested forfeited shares Earliest
Date of at during during during at vesting
grant 01.04.091 this year2 this year3 this year 31.03.10 date
Chris Grigg 21.05.2009 29,266 29,266 21.05.2012

Graham Roberts 14.07.2006 14,974 14,974 14.07.2009
22.05.2007 13,762 13,762 22.05.2010
20.05.2008 22,862 22,862 20.05.2011
21.05.2009 39,286 39,286 21.05.2012
Tim Roberts 14.07.2006 12,966 12,966 14.07.2009
22.05.2007 14,318 14,318 22.05.2010
Performance Review
20.05.2008 33,344 33,344 20.05.2011
21.05.2009 50,746 50,746 21.05.2012
Andrew Jones 14.07.2006 14,584 14,584 14.07.2009
22.05.2007 17,070 17,0704 22.05.2010
20.05.2008 30,964 30,9644 20.05.2011
21.05.2009 57,294 57,2944 21.05.2012
1 The number of shares shown above is the maximum awards achievable under the Matching Share Plan on maximum outperformance of the Plan’s TSR and EPS targets.
2 On 21 April 2009, the date bonus was withheld from salary, the market price was 407.25p.
3 These shares vested on 18 September 2009, on full attainment of both the TSR and EPS performance conditions. These shares had been awarded on 14 July 2006. The market price
on that day was 1,063p. The market price on 18 September 2009 was 512.76p. A gain of £66,484 was realised to Tim Roberts, £76,781 to Graham Roberts and £74,781 to Andrew Jones.
7,630 shares were retained by Tim Roberts, Graham Roberts and Andrew Jones sold all their shares.
4 These shares were forfeited on 8 December 2009. In accordance with the Scheme Rules when he withdrew his ‘Bonus Shares’ on this date, the corresponding Matching Award
Governance
lapsed from the Trust. He had ceased to be a director on 13 October 2009.
(vii) Fund Managers Performance Plan

Cash
element
of award No of shares No of shares No of shares
No of shares received awarded vested forfeited No of shares
Date of at during during during during at
grant 01.04.09 the year the year1 the year the year 31.03.10 Vesting period
Tim Roberts 14.08.2008 103,249 103,2493 14.08.09 – 14.10.11

Andrew Jones 14.07.2006 68,765 68,765 14.07.07 – 14.07.09
30.05.2007 67,251 33,625 33,6262 30.05.08 – 30.05.10
14.08.2008 25,009 8,336 16,6732 14.08.09 – 14.10.11
17.06.2009 £187,000 189,127 189,1272 17.06.09 – 17.06.12
1 On 17 June 2009, the date of grant, the market price was 395.5p.
2 These shares were forfeited on 19 January 2010 on leaving employment. He had ceased to be a director on 13 October 2009.
3 These Shares were forfeited during the year due to ‘claw back’ as British Land’s Office portfolio underperformed during the financial year 2008/09.
An award comprises a cash element, which is equal to 20% of the total award value paid at award to participants, and shares, which are equal to 80% of the award value and, at nil
consideration, which will conditionally vest in three equal tranches on the first, second and third anniversaries of grants, subject to clawback and continued employment. The market
price at grant for the award on 14 July 2006 was 1,321.6p, for the award on 30 May 2007, 1,427p, for the award on 14 August 2008, 619.8p and 386p for the award on 17 June 2009 valuing
those share awards at grant respectively £2,258,998, £1,192,744, £155,024 and £730,030 for Andrew Jones, and, for 2008, £640,000 for Tim Roberts. On 1 June 2009, 33,635 shares
awarded on 30 May 2007 to Andrew Jones vested. The market price on that day was 392p realising a gain of £131,849. Andrew Jones sold all of these shares. On 18 September 2009
68,765 shares awarded on 14 July 2006 and 8,336 shares awarded on 14 August 2008, to Andrew Jones vested. The market price on that day was 512.76p realising a gain of £352,599
for shares awarded on 14 July 2006 and a gain of £ 42,744 for the shares awarded on 14 August 2008. Andrew Jones sold all his shares.
The British Land Share Ownership Plan (the Trust), a discretionary trust, has been established to facilitate the operation of the above long-term
Other Information
incentive schemes. The Trustees of the Trust purchase the Company’s ordinary shares in the open market in order to satisfy the above Awards.
If Awards vest, immediately after vesting, shares are transferred out of the Trust to the Scheme’s participants as appropriate. Rights to dividends
under the above share incentive schemes are retained by the Trust in interest bearing accounts and are payable to employees only on the vesting
of the employee’s shares; along with, in the case of the Long-Term Incentive Plan, interest earned on the accrued dividends. Dividend and interest
distributions in the year arising from the above schemes totalled £11,958 to Graham Roberts, £10,355 to Tim Roberts and £93,593 to Andrew Jones.
In the event of a variation of capital, the Trustees (having considered the recommendations of the Board) have discretion to take such action as they
consider appropriate.

Directors’ pension benefits for the year ended 31 March 2010

Two executive directors, Graham Roberts and Tim Roberts, earned pension benefits in schemes sponsored by the Company during the year.
Chris Grigg receives a sum equal to 35% of basic salary in lieu of pension contributions, which for the year amounted to £280,000 (2009: £62,575).
The Company also contributed a sum equal to 15% of Charles Maudsley and Stephen Smith’s basic salaries, which for the period since being appointed
as directors (on 1 February 2010 and 4 January 2010 respectively) amounted to £10,625 and £15,685 respectively. The Company paid Andrew Jones
pension related payments of a sum equal to 35% of his basic salary, of which 15% was paid to his individual ‘money purchase’ pension scheme and
20% paid as cash. For the period to his leaving office as a director of the Company on 13 October 2009 this amounted to £79,445 in total. He continued
in employment with the Company until 19 January 2010, in which time a further £41,588 in total was contributed (2009: £63,750 in total).
Non-executive directors do not participate in any Company sponsored pension arrangement.
Since the Directors’ Remuneration Report Regulations 2002 came into force, company accounts are subject to two sets of disclosure requirements
in relation to directors’ pensions rather than one. The extended Companies Act 2006 requirements have to be observed in addition to, not in place
of, the current UK Listing Authority requirements. The requirements differ slightly and these Regulations are expected to remain in force for the
time being. The two tables shown below provide the details of directors’ pensions necessary to satisfy the two sets of requirements.
Companies Act 2006 Disclosure Requirements

Increase in
Additional Transfer Transfer transfer value
Accrued pension Accrued value value less director’s
pension earned pension of accrued of accrued contributions
entitlement during entitlement pension at pension at paid during
Age at at year start the year at year end start of year year end the year
Name year end £ pa £ pa £ pa £ £ £
Graham Roberts 51 83,000 37,300 120,300 1,603,000 2,662,700 1,059,700

Tim Roberts 45 43,600 5,300 48,900 673,300 887,500 214,200
UK Listing Authority Disclosure Requirements

Transfer value
Increase in of additional
accrued Total pension earned
Accrued pension accrued less director’s Premiums
pension during the year pension contributions paid in
entitlement (in excess entitlement paid during respect of
Age at at year start of inflation) at year end the year* life cover
Name year end £ pa £ pa £ pa £ £
Graham Roberts 51 83,000 37,300 120,300 824,600 8,398

Tim Roberts 45 43,600 5,300 48,900 96,300 5,284
*See note 6b below.
Notes
1 The total accrued pension shown are those that would be paid annually on retirement at age 60 based on service to the end of the year.
2 Graham Roberts has a contractual entitlement of a pension of two-thirds of Final Pensionable Salary at age 60. At the start of the year this contractual entitlement was being met
using a Company Funded Unapproved Retirement Benefit Scheme (FURBS) arrangement and a pension payable from the British Land Group of Companies Pension Scheme.
Over the year the Remuneration Committee were advised that continued accrual in the FURBS arrangement was no longer tax efficient. No further contributions are being made
to the FURBS and the balance of Graham Roberts’ contractual promise will now be met by an unfunded Employer Financed Retirement Benefit Scheme (EFRBS) arrangement.
3 As disclosed in last year’s report, the benefit provided by the FURBS was a lump sum paid based on salary above the Earnings Cap. To convert this into pension equivalent at the
start of the year we have used the basis used for setting commutation factors in the British Land Group of Companies Pension Scheme. This is consistent with the way part of the
total promise met by the benefits from the FURBS will be calculated.
4 Contributions and investment returns in the FURBS are taxed whereas the benefits are paid tax free. The pension equivalent shown above for Graham Roberts are a mixture of
FURBS pension paid free of income tax and pension from the Registered Scheme and EFRBS that will be taxed as income.
5 Members of the Scheme have the option to pay Additional Voluntary Contributions. Neither the contributions nor the resulting benefits are included in the above table.
6 The following is additional information relating to directors’ pensions for those included in the above table:
a. Normal retirement age for pension arrangements is age 60.
b. Members of the Scheme were not required to pay contributions during the year.
c. Retirement may take place at any age after 55 subject to the consent of both the Company and the Trustees of the Scheme. Pensions are reduced to allow for their earlier payment.
d. On death in service, the Scheme provides a capital sum equal to four times salary and a spouse’s pension of two-thirds of the member’s prospective pension at age 60. If a Member
is entitled to a deferred pension, a spouse’s pension of two-thirds of the member’s accrued pension is payable on death before or after retirement. These pensions are paid
throughout the spouse’s lifetime or until the youngest child reaches age 18 (or age 23 if in full time education), if later.
e. Pensions are guaranteed to increase each year in line with the increase in the Retail Prices Index (RPI) subject to a maximum of 5%. The Trustees may grant additional
discretionary increases subject to the consent of the Company. Statutory increases apply to pensions during deferment.
f. Transfer value calculations allow for discretionary pension increases such that, in aggregate, pension increases in line with increases in the RPI are valued.
This report was approved by the Board on 17 May 2010.
Lord Turnbull Chairman of the Remuneration Committee

Our Business
ADDITIONAL DISCLOSURES
Reappointment of directors Share Incentive Plan (SIP) and Sharesave. Under the SIP the Company
The directors listed on the Board of Directors page constituted the gives eligible employees up to £3,000 in free shares every year and
Strategy in Action
Board during the year save that: Kate Swann and Andrew Jones they can also purchase partnership shares for up to £1,500 a year, that
who resigned from the Board on 10 July 2009 and 13 October 2009 are matched two for one by the Company. Under the Sharesave, eligible
respectively; Dido Harding and Richard Pym who were appointed employees can save up to £250 over a three or five-year period and
directors on 1 January 2010; and Stephen Smith and Charles Maudsley use the savings to exercise an option granted at the outset at a 20%
who were appointed as directors on 4 January 2010 and 1 February discount to the then prevailing share price.
2010 respectively. Each director retires after the third AGM after the
general meeting at which he was appointed. Dido Harding, Charles Directors’ interests in contracts
Maudsley, Richard Pym and Stephen Smith offer themselves for No contract existed during the year in relation to the Company’s
election in accordance with the Articles. Clive Cowdery offers himself business in which any director was materially interested.
for re-election in accordance with the Articles. Robert Swannell offers
himself for annual re-election in accordance with the Combined Code, Directors’ liability insurance and indemnity
Performance Review
as he has served more than nine years. The Company has arranged insurance cover in respect of legal action
against its directors. To the extent permitted by UK law, the Company
Purchase of own shares also indemnifies the directors.
The Company was granted authority at the Annual General Meeting
in 2009 to purchase its own shares up to a total aggregate value of 10% Substantial interests
of the issued nominal capital. That authority expires at this year’s As at 17 May 2010 the Company had been notified of the following major
Annual General Meeting and a resolution will be proposed for its renewal. interests in its issued ordinary share capital.
% of issued
During the year the Company made no purchases of its own shares. No of shares capital
Government of Singapore Investment

Share capital
Corporation Private Limited 42,014,236 4.80
The Company has one class of ordinary share and all shares rank
Governance
equally and are fully paid (25p each). There are neither restrictions on Legal and General Group PLC 34,283,631 3.92
the transfer of shares nor on the size of a holding. There are no significant APG Algemene Pensioen Groep N.V. 34,793,042 3.98
agreements to which the Company is party that take effect, alter or
terminate upon a change of control of the Company.
Disclosure of information to auditors
The issued share capital has been increased since 1 April 2009 by fully Each of the persons who is a director at the date of approval of this
paid issues as follows: report confirms that:
No of ordinary
shares of 25p
(1) so far as the director is aware, there is no relevant audit information
06 April 2009, 03 July 2009, Shares in lieu of directors’ fees 19,262 of which the Company’s auditors are unaware; and
02 September 2009,
21 December 2009 and (2) the director has taken all the steps that he/she ought to have taken
29 March 2010 as a director in order to make himself/herself aware of any relevant
audit information and to establish that the Company’s auditors are
07 May 2009 to On exercise of options under the 6,014
aware of that information.
09 September 2009 Long-Term Incentive Plan (LTIP)
06 May 2009 to 17 May 2010 On exercise of options under 10,851 This confirmation is given and should be interpreted in accordance
the Sharesave Scheme with the provisions of section 418 of the Companies Act 2006.
25 November 2009 LTIP Award Allotment 45,213

Annual General Meeting
14 August 2009 to Scrip Allotment 15,765,557 The Annual General Meeting of The British Land Company PLC will
13 February 2010 be held at The Ocean Room, The Cumberland Hotel, Great Cumberland
28 September 2009 Share Incentive Plan 129,989 Place, London W1A 4RF on Friday 16 July 2010, at 11.00 am.
Other Information
‘Free Share’ Award This report was approved by the Board on 17 May 2010.
Employee Share Schemes Anthony Braine

As well as the discretionary share schemes detailed in the Remuneration Secretary
Report the Company operates two all employee share schemes, the 17 May 2010

CONSOLIDATED INCOME STATEMENT
For the year ended 31 March 2010
2010 2009
Underlying Capital Underlying Capital

pre-tax† and other Total pre-tax† and other Total
Note £m £m £m £m £m £m
Gross rental and related income 3 394 394 554 554

Net rental and related income 3 337 337 453 453
Fees and other income 4 13 13 18 18
Amortisation of intangible assets (15) (15) (14) (14)
Joint ventures and funds (see also below) 81 398 479 55 (822) (767)
Administrative expenses (55) (55) (51) (51)
Net valuation movement (includes profits & losses on disposals) 6 496 496 (3,241) (3,241)
Net financing costs: – financing income 7 30 30 52 52
– financing charges 7 (157) (157) (259) (119) (378)
(127) (127) (207) (119) (326)
Profit (loss) on ordinary activities before taxation 249 879 1,128 268 (4,196) (3,928)
Taxation: – current tax income (expense) 8 24 24 (2) (2)

– deferred tax (expense) income 8 (12) (12) 49 49
12 12 47 47
Profit (loss) for the year after taxation
attributable to shareholders of the Company 1,140 (3,881)
Earnings (loss) per share: – basic 2 133p (616)p

– diluted 2 133p (614)p
Share of results of joint ventures and funds

Underlying profit before taxation 81 81 55 55
Net valuation movement (includes profits & losses on disposals) 412 412 (833) (833)
Non-recurring items (9) (9)
Current tax (expense) income (5) (5) 2 2
Deferred tax income 9 9
12 81 398 479 55 (822) (767)
†
As defined in note 2.
86 The British Land Company PLC Financial Statements

Our Business
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
As at 31 March 2010
2010 2009
Note £m £m
Strategy in Action
Assets
Non-current assets
Investment properties 11 4,126 5,436
Development properties 11 358
Owner-occupied property 11 33 30
4,159 5,824
Other non-current assets
Investments in joint ventures and funds 12 1,594 952
Other investments 13 261 38
Intangible assets 13 10 25
6,024 6,839
Performance Review
Current assets
Debtors 14 105 123
Liquid investments 18 195
Cash and short-term deposits 18 74 616
374 739
Total assets 6,398 7,578
Liabilities
Current liabilities
Short-term borrowings and overdrafts 18 (139) (49)
Governance
Creditors 15 (332) (524)
(471) (573)
Non-current liabilities
Debentures and loans 18 (1,642) (3,716)
Other non-current liabilities 16 (30) (45)
Deferred tax liabilities 17 (47) (35)
(1,719) (3,796)
Total liabilities (2,190) (4,369)
Net assets 4,208 3,209
Equity
Share capital 220 217
Share premium 1,241 1,244
Other reserves (90) (139)
Retained earnings 2,837 1,887
Total equity attributable to shareholders of the Company 4,208 3,209
EPRA NAV per share† 2 504p 398p

Other Information
†
As defined in note 2.
Chris Gibson-Smith Graham Roberts

Chairman Finance Director
Approved by the Board and authorised for issue on 17 May 2010.
Company number 621920
Financial Statements The British Land Company PLC 87

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT
OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
2010 2009
Note £m £m
Profit (loss) for the year after taxation 1,140 (3,881)
Other comprehensive income:

Valuation movements
– on development properties 6 (44)
– on owner-occupied property 6 (3)
– on other investments 6 (88)
(135)
Losses on cash flow hedges
– Group (6) (182)
– Joint ventures and funds (10) (46)
Transferred to the income statement (cash flow hedges)
– foreign currency derivatives 6 (30)
– interest rate derivatives 23 109
29 79
Exchange differences on translation of foreign operations (1) 5
Net actuarial loss on pension scheme (2) (2)
Tax on items taken directly to equity 24
Other comprehensive income (loss) for the year 10 (257)
Total comprehensive income (loss) for the year 1,150 (4,138)

Our Business
OF CASH FLOWS
2010 2009
Note £m £m
Strategy in Action
Rental income received from tenants 317 455
Fees and other income received 15 30
Operating expenses paid to suppliers and employees (84) (79)
Cash generated from operations 248 406
Interest paid (179) (270)

Interest received 9 20
UK corporation tax (paid) received (3) 16
Distributions and other receivables from joint ventures and funds 61 33
Net cash inflow from operating activities 136 205
Performance Review
Cash flows from investing activities
Purchase of investment properties (75) (107)
Development and other capital expenditure (173) (436)
Sale of investment properties 279 904
REIT conversion charge recovered (paid) 6 (6)
Purchase of investments (43)
Sale of investments 13
Indirect taxes in respect of investing activities (4) 3
Establishment of Meadowhall joint venture 115
Establishment of Broadgate joint venture 31
Investment in Shopping Centres joint venture with Tesco (26)
Governance
Investment in and loans to joint ventures and funds (56) (57)
Capital distributions received from joint ventures and funds 7 2
Net cash (outflow) inflow from investing activities (41) 418
Cash flows from financing activities

Issue of ordinary shares 743
Dividends paid (154) (188)
Repayment of debt acquired with subsidiary undertaking (11)
Movement in other financial liabilities (20) (76)
Establishment of Broadgate joint venture – cash collateral (266)
Increase in liquid investments (200)
Increase (decrease) in bank and other borrowings 1 (714)
Net cash outflow from financing activities (639) (246)
Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents (544) 377

Cash and cash equivalents at 1 April 616 239
Cash and cash equivalents at 31 March 72 616
Cash and cash equivalents consists of:

Cash and short-term deposits 18 74 616
Overdrafts (2)
Other Information
72 616

OF CHANGES IN EQUITY
Hedging and
Share Share Merger translation Revaluation Retained
capital* premium reserve* reserve* reserve* earnings Total
£m £m £m £m £m £m £m
Balance at 1 April 2009 217 1,244 (98) (41) 1,887 3,209

Profit for the year after taxation 1,140 1,140
Reallocation of hedging reserve on disposal 37 (37)
Joint venture and fund revaluations (10) (10)
Losses on cash flow hedges (6) (6)
Reclassification of losses on cash flow hedges
to profit for the year after taxation
– foreign currency derivatives 6 6
Foreign exchange movements (1) (1)
Net actuarial loss on pension schemes (2) (2)
Other comprehensive income 60 (11) (39) 10
Total comprehensive income for the year 60 (11) 1,101 1,150
Share issues 3 (3)
Adjustment for share and share option awards 1 1
Dividends payable in year (27.3p per share) (215) (215)
Adjustment for scrip dividend element 63 63
Balance at 31 March 2010 220 1,241 (38) (52) 2,837 4,208
Balance at 1 April 2008 131 1,269 3 332 5,055 6,790

Loss for the year after taxation (3,881) (3,881)
Development property revaluations (44) (44)
Transfer on practical completion of developments (219) 219
Revaluation of owner-occupied property (3) (3)
Revaluation of investments (88) (88)
Joint venture and fund revaluations (46) (46)
Losses on cash flow hedges (182) (182)
Reclassification of losses (gains) on cash flow hedges
to loss for the year after taxation
– foreign currency derivatives (30) (30)
Foreign exchange movements 2 3 5
Net actuarial loss on pension schemes (2) (2)
Deferred tax taken to equity 24 24
Other comprehensive income (101) (373) 217 (257)
Total comprehensive income for the year (101) (373) (3,664) (4,138)
Share issues 86 (25) 682 743
Transfer (682) 682
Adjustment for share and share option awards (1) (1)
Dividends payable in year (30p per share) (185) (185)
Balance at 31 March 2009 217 1,244 (98) (41) 1,887 3,209
*Refer to note 21.

Our Business
NOTES TO THE ACCOUNTS
1 Basis of preparation Subsidiaries, joint ventures and associates (including funds)

The financial statements for the year ended 31 March 2010 have The consolidated accounts include the accounts of The British Land
Strategy in Action
been prepared on the historical cost basis, except for the revaluation Company PLC and all subsidiaries (entities controlled by British Land).
of properties, investments and derivatives. The financial statements Control is assumed where British Land has the power to govern the
have also been prepared in accordance with International Financial financial and operating policies of an investee entity so as to gain
Reporting Standards (IFRSs) as adopted by the European Union benefits from its activities.
and therefore comply with Article 4 of the EU IAS Regulation.
The results of subsidiaries, joint ventures or associates acquired
The accounting policies used are consistent with those contained or disposed of during the year are included from the effective date
in the Group’s last annual report and accounts for the year ended of acquisition or to the effective date of disposal. Accounting practices
31 March 2009, with the exception of the following: of subsidiaries, joint ventures or associates which differ from Group
> the adoption of the amendments to IAS 1 (revised) which now accounting policies are adjusted on consolidation.
requires the presentation of a statement of changes in equity
Business combinations are accounted for under the acquisition
Performance Review
as a primary statement;
method. Any excess of the purchase price of business combinations
> the adoption of revisions to IAS 16 Property, Plant & Equipment
over the fair value of the assets, liabilities and contingent liabilities
and IAS 40 Investment Property, which have had the effect to bring
acquired and resulting deferred tax thereon is recognised as goodwill.
property under construction or development for future use as an
Any discount received is credited to the income statement in the
investment property within the scope of IAS 40, whereas previously
period of acquisition. All intra-group transactions, balances, income
it had been within the scope of IAS 16. The Group has taken advantage
and expenses are eliminated on consolidation.
of the transitional provisions of not having to restate figures.
This has resulted in all changes in fair value being recognised Joint ventures and associates, including funds, are accounted for
in the income statement rather than in equity. This has not affected under the equity method, whereby the consolidated balance sheet
profits before tax, net assets or underlying profits before tax incorporates the Group’s share of the net assets of its joint ventures
and comparative results have not needed to be restated; and and associates. The consolidated income statement incorporates
> amendments to IFRS 7 Financial Instruments have been adopted the Group’s share of joint venture and associate profits after tax upon
Governance
taking advantage of transitional provisions of not providing elimination of upstream transactions. Their profits include revaluation
comparative information. movements on investment properties.
Standards and guidelines not effective for the current accounting period
Properties
were: IFRS 2 Share-Based Payment – Amendments relating to group
Properties are externally valued on an open market basis at the
cash-settled share-based payment transactions; IFRS 3 Business
balance sheet date. Investment and owner-occupied properties
Combinations and IAS 27 Consolidated and Separate Financial
are recorded at valuation.
Statements – Comprehensive revision on applying the acquisition
method; IAS 32 Financial Instruments: Presentation – Amendments Any surplus or deficit arising on revaluing investment properties is
relating to classification of Rights Issues. recognised in the income statement.
The directors do not expect that the adoption of these Standards and Any surplus arising on revaluing owner-occupied properties above
Interpretations will have a material impact on the financial statements cost is recognised in equity, whereby any deficit arising in revaluation
of the Group in future periods. below cost is recognised in the income statement.
Critical accounting judgments are disclosed in the relevant section The cost of properties in the course of development includes attributable
of the Annual Report, see page 31. The key source of estimation interest and other associated outgoings. Interest is calculated on the
and uncertainty relates to the valuation of the property portfolio and development expenditure by reference to specific borrowings where
investments, where an external valuation is obtained. In accounting relevant and otherwise on the average rate applicable to short-term
for net rental income, the Group is required to judge the recoverability loans. Interest is not capitalised where no development activity is taking
of any income accrued and provides against the credit risk on these place. A property ceases to be treated as a development property on
amounts. Other less significant assumptions include the actuarial practical completion.
assumptions used in calculating the Group’s retirement benefit
Disposals are recognised on completion: profits and losses arising
obligations, the valuation of fixed rate debt and interest rate derivatives,
Other Information
are recognised through the income statement, the profit on disposal

and the share-based payment expense. The potential for management
is determined as the difference between the sales proceeds and the
to make judgements or estimates relating to these that would have
carrying amount of the asset at the commencement of the accounting
a significant impact on the financial statements is considered, by the
period plus additions in the period.
nature of Group business, to be limited.
In determining whether leases and related properties represent
Going concern operating or finance leases, consideration is given to whether the
The financial statements are prepared on a going concern basis tenant or landlord bears the risks and rewards of ownership.
as explained in the Corporate Governance section on page 72.

NOTES TO THE ACCOUNTS CONTINUED
Intangible assets rent does not exceed the external valuation. Initial direct costs incurred
Intangible assets, such as fund management contracts, acquired in negotiating and arranging a new lease are amortised on a straight-
through business combinations, are measured initially at fair value and line basis over the period from the date of lease commencement to the
are amortised on a straight-line basis over their estimated useful lives, earliest termination date.
and are subject to regular reviews for impairment.
Where a lease incentive payment, including surrender premiums
paid, does not enhance the value of a property, it is amortised on a
Goodwill
straight-line basis over the period from the date of lease commencement
Goodwill arising on consolidation represents the excess of the cost of
to the earliest termination date. Upon receipt of a surrender premium
acquisition over the Group’s interest in the fair value of the identifiable
for the early determination of a lease, the profit, net of dilapidations
assets and liabilities of the subsidiary, associate or jointly controlled
and non-recoverable outgoings relating to the lease concerned, is
entity at the time of acquisition. Goodwill is reviewed for impairment
immediately reflected in income.
on an annual basis.
Management and performance fees
Financial assets and liabilities
Management and performance fees receivable are recognised in the
Trade receivables and payables are initially recognised at fair value and
period to which they relate, except for performance fee retentions
subsequently measured at amortised cost and discounted as appropriate.
subject to clawback, which are recognised over the clawback performance
Other investments are shown at amortised cost and held as loans period. In assessing the risk of clawback, account is taken of the
and receivables. Loans and receivables are measured at amortised unpredictability of future relative performance against the benchmark.
cost using the effective interest method, less any impairment.
Interest income is recognised by applying the effective interest rate. Taxation
Current tax is based on taxable profit for the year and is calculated
Liquid investments are shown at fair value and held as held for trading
using tax rates that have been enacted or substantively enacted.
financial assets. Gains and losses from the changes in fair value are
Taxable profit differs from net profit as reported in the income
recorded in the income statement.
statement because it excludes items of income or expense that
Where an investment property is held under a head lease it is initially are not taxable (or tax deductible).
recognised as an asset as the sum of the premium paid on acquisition
Deferred tax is provided on items that may become taxable at a
and the present value of minimum ground rent payments. The
later date, on the difference between the balance sheet value and
corresponding rent liability to the head leaseholder is included in
tax base value, on an undiscounted basis. On business combinations,
the balance sheet as a finance lease obligation.
the deferred tax effect of fair value adjustments is incorporated in
Debt instruments are stated at their net proceeds on issue. Finance the consolidated balance sheet.
charges including premiums payable on settlement or redemption
and direct issue costs are spread over the period to redemption, Employee costs
using the effective interest method. The fair value of equity-settled share-based payments to employees
is determined at the date of grant and is expensed on a straight-line
As defined by IAS 39, cash flow and fair value hedges are carried at fair
basis over the vesting period based on the Group’s estimate of shares
value in the balance sheet. Changes in the fair value of derivatives that
or options that will eventually vest. In the case of options granted, fair
are designated and qualify as effective cash flow hedges are recognised
value is measured by a Black-Scholes pricing model. Compensation
directly in the hedging reserve. Changes in the fair value of derivatives
linked to performance fees accrued by the Group is amortised over
that are designated and qualify as effective fair value hedges are
the vesting period.
recorded in the income statement, along with any changes in the fair
value of the hedged item that is attributable to the hedged risk. Any Defined benefit pension scheme assets are measured using fair values;
ineffective portion of all derivatives is recognised in the income statement. pension scheme liabilities are measured using the projected unit credit
method and discounted at the rate of return of a high-quality corporate
Cash equivalents are limited to instruments with a maturity of less than
bond of equivalent term to the scheme liabilities. The net surplus
three months.
(where recoverable by the Group) or deficit is recognised in full in the
consolidated balance sheet. Any asset resulting from the calculation is
Net rental income
limited to past service costs plus the present value of available refunds
Rental income is recognised on an accruals basis. A rent adjustment
and reductions in future contributions to the plan.
based on open market estimated rental value is recognised from the
rent review date in relation to unsettled rent reviews. Where a rent-free The current service cost and gains and losses on settlement and
period is included in a lease, the rental income foregone is allocated curtailments are charged to operating profit. Past service costs are
evenly over the period from the date of lease commencement to the recognised in the income statement if the benefits have vested or, if they
earliest termination date. have not vested, are amortised on a straight-line basis over the period
until vesting occurs. Actuarial gains and losses are recognised in full
Rental income from fixed and minimum guaranteed rent reviews is
in the period in which they occur and are presented in the consolidated
recognised on a straight-line basis over the shorter of the entire lease
statement of comprehensive income.
term or the period to the first break option. Where such rental income
is recognised ahead of the related cash flow, an adjustment is made to Contributions to the Group’s defined contribution schemes are expensed
ensure the carrying value of the related property including the accrued on the basis of the contracted annual contribution.

Our Business
2 Performance measures
2010 2009
Earnings
Earnings Pence per (loss) Pence per
Earnings per share (diluted) £m share £m share
Underlying pre-tax profit – income statement 249 268
Strategy in Action
Tax charge relating to underlying profit (5) (9)
Underlying earnings per share 244 28.4p 259 41.0p
Realisation of cash flow hedges/non-recurring items* (9) (119)

EPRA earnings per share 235 27.3p 140 22.2p
Profit (loss) for the year after taxation 1,140 133p (3,881) (614)p
*In the year ended 31 March 2010 debt break costs of £9m were incurred in HUT – see note 12 (2009: Realisation of cash flow hedges £119m – see note 7).
The European Public Real Estate Association (EPRA) issued Best Practices Policy Recommendations in July 2009, which gives guidelines for
Performance Review
performance measures. The EPRA earnings measure excludes investment property revaluations and gains or losses on disposals, intangible
asset movements and their related taxation.
Underlying earnings consists of the EPRA earnings measure, with additional company adjustments. Adjustments include realisation of cash
flow hedges and non-recurring items, see note 7. The weighted average number of shares in issue for the year was: basic: 857m (2009: 630m);
diluted for the effect of share options: 860m (2009: 632m). Basic undiluted earnings per share for the year was 133p (2009: 616p loss).
2010 2009
Net asset value (NAV) (diluted) £m £m
Balance sheet net assets 4,208 3,209

Deferred tax arising on revaluation movements 43 25
Mark to market on effective cash flow hedges and related debt adjustments 126 153
Governance
Dilution effect of share options 30
EPRA NAV 4,407 3,387
EPRA NAV per share 504p 398p
The EPRA NAV per share excludes the mark to market on effective cash flow hedges and related debt adjustments, deferred taxation on revaluations
and is calculated on a fully diluted basis. At 31 March 2010, the number of shares in issue was: basic: 866m (2009: 850m); diluted for the effect of
share options: 875m (2009: 851m).
Total return per share for the year ended 31 March 2010 of 33.5% represents an increase in EPRA NAV per share of 106p in addition to dividends
paid of 27.3p (see note 20). Total return per share for the year ended 31 March 2009 was minus 61.6%.
3 Gross and net rental income
2010 2009
£m £m
Rent receivable 319 462

Spreading of tenant incentives and guaranteed rent increases 23 34
Surrender premiums 1
Gross rental income 342 497
Service charge income 52 57

Gross rental and related income 394 554
Other Information
Service charge expenses (52) (57)

Property operating expenses (5) (44)
Net rental and related income 337 453
The cash element of net rental income recognised during the year ended 31 March 2010 from properties which were not subject to a security
interest was £81m (2009: £103m). Property operating expenses relating to investment properties that did not generate any rental income were
£1m (2009: £1m).

4 Fees and other income

2010 2009
£m £m
Performance fees (from funds) 3

Management fees (from joint ventures and funds) 7 11
Other fees and commission 6 4
13 18
There were no performance fees receivable from HUT or HIF for the years ended 31 December 2009 or 31 December 2008. Some 50% of undistributed
performance fees are payable each year provided there is no clawback. In relation to HUT, all unpaid deferred fees relating to calendar years 2005
and 2006 have been clawed back in the current year. The basis on which HUT performance fees are calculated has been amended with effect from
1 January 2010 to a rolling three year period with no clawbacks.
5 Other income statement disclosures

2010 2009
(i) Total revenue Note £m £m
Gross rental and related income 3 394 554

Fees and other income 4 13 18
Total revenue in the year 407 572
2010 2009
(ii) Auditors’ remuneration – Deloitte LLP £m £m
Fees payable to the Company’s auditors for the audit of the Company’s annual accounts 0.3 0.5
Fees payable to the Company’s auditors and its associates for other services:
Audit of the Company’s subsidiaries pursuant to legislation 0.3 0.3
Services relating to rights issue 0.5
Services relating to Broadgate joint venture transaction 0.5
Other services pursuant to legislation 0.1 0.1
1.2 1.4
Tax services 0.2 0.5
All other services 0.1 0.2
1.5 2.1
(iii) Exchange gains recognised in the profit and loss account total £2m (2009: £1m).
6 Net revaluation gains (losses) on property and investments

2010 2009
£m £m
Consolidated income statement

Revaluation of properties 530 (2,994)
Result on property disposals (18) (177)
Other revaluations and losses (4) (1)
496 (3,241)
Share of profits (losses) of joint ventures and funds 412 (833)
908 (4,074)
Consolidated statement of comprehensive income
Revaluation of development properties (44)
Revaluation of owner-occupied property (3)
Revaluation of investments (88)
(135)
908 (4,209)

Our Business
7 Net financing costs
2010 2009
£m £m
Interest payable on:

Bank loans and overdrafts 12 31
Other loans 146 230
Strategy in Action
Obligations under finance leases 1 1
159 262
Development interest capitalised (13) (38)
146 224
Interest receivable on:
Deposits, securities and liquid investments (15) (17)
Loans to joint ventures (3)
(18) (17)
Other finance (income) costs:
Expected return on pension scheme assets (5) (5)
Performance Review
Interest on pension scheme liabilities 4 5
Valuation movements on translation of foreign currency debt (6) 30
Hedging reserve recycling 6 (30)
Valuation movements on fair value debt 1
Valuation movements on fair value derivatives (1)
Net financing expenses – pre exceptional 127 207
Exceptional item
Realisation of cash flow hedges 119

Net financing costs 127 326
Governance
Total financing income (30) (52)
Total financing expenses 157 378
Net financing costs 127 326
Interest on development expenditure is capitalised at a rate of 5.27% (2009: 5.5%).
Other Information

8 Taxation
2010 2009
£m £m
Tax expense (income)

Current tax
UK corporation tax: 28% (2009: 28%) 2 6
Foreign tax 1
2 7
Adjustments in respect of prior years (26) (5)
Total current tax (income) expense (24) 2
Deferred tax on revaluations 12 (49)
Group total taxation (net) (12) (47)
Attributable to joint ventures and funds 5 (11)
Total taxation (7) (58)
Tax reconciliation
Profit (loss) on ordinary activities before taxation 1,128 (3,928)
Less: (profit) loss attributable to joint ventures and funds (479) 767
Group profit (loss) on ordinary activities before taxation 649 (3,161)
Tax on profit (loss) on ordinary activities at UK corporation tax rate of 28% (2009: 28%) 182 (885)
Effects of:
REIT exempt income and gains (170) 881
Tax losses and other timing differences 2 (38)
Adjustments in respect of prior years (26) (5)
Group total taxation (12) (47)
Tax expense attributable to underlying profits for the year ended 31 March 2010 was £5m (2009: £9m). Corporation tax payable at 31 March 2010
was £23m (2009: £40m) as shown in note 15.
9 Staff costs
Staff costs (including directors)
2010 2009
£m £m
Wages and salaries 32 37

Social security costs 4 4
Pension costs 4 4
Equity-settled share-based payments 5 (1)
45 44
The average monthly number of employees of the Company during the year was 164 (2009: 162). The average monthly number of Group employees,
including those employed directly at the Group’s properties and their costs recharged to tenants, was 443 (2009: 728).
The Executive Directors are the key management personnel and their remuneration is disclosed in the Remuneration Report on pages 73 to 84.
Staff costs
The Group’s equity-settled share-based payments comprise the Long-Term Incentive Plan (LTIP), the Matching Share Plan (MSP), the Fund
Managers Performance Plan (FMPP), the Share Incentive Plan (SIP), various Sharesave Plans and four recruitment schemes relating to
Executive Board members.
The Company expenses an estimate of how many shares are likely to vest based on the market price at the date of grant, taking account of
expected performance against the relevant performance targets and service periods.

Our Business
9 Staff costs continued
Long-Term Incentive Plan (LTIP)
Under the LTIP the Company may award employees a combination of performance shares and options. Both components have the same
performance targets based on net asset value per share growth and a three-year service period. For both LTIP components the Company
estimates the number of shares or options likely to vest and expenses that value over the relevant period. Performance shares are valued at
the market value at the date of the award. The options are valued using a Black-Scholes model adjusted for dividends, see table below. Volatility
Strategy in Action
has been estimated by taking the historical volatility in the Company’s share price over a four-year period and adjusting where there are known
factors that may affect future volatility. No other features of the option grant were incorporated into the measurement of fair value.
Long-Term Incentive Plan: 2009 awards

21 Dec 25 Nov 29 Jun
2009 2009 2009
Share price and exercise price at grant date 446p 475p 387p
Option life in years 7 7 7
Risk free rate 3.3% 3.1% 3.1%
Expected volatility 43% 43% 43%
Expected dividend yield 6% 6% 8%
Value per option 109p 120p 76p
Performance Review
Matching Share Plan (MSP)
The MSP allows eligible employees to receive one-third of their annual bonus in shares, held in trust, which following performance targets based
on total shareholder return and earnings per share being achieved over a three-year period will be matched 2 for 1 by the Company. The Company
expenses the estimated number of shares likely to vest over the three-year period based on the market price at the date of grant.
Fund Managers Performance Plan (FMPP)

Under the FMPP the Company may award employees a combination of cash (20% of the award) and shares based on a maximum of 30% of the
annual performance fee earned by the Unit Trusts and, as agreed by shareholders in 2008, in respect of a comparative notional pool for British
Land owned portfolios. The cash is awarded following the performance year under review with the shares released over the following three years
Governance
subject to clawback due to subsequent property underperformance and continued employment. The Company expenses an estimate of the fair
value of the award over the period to full vesting.
Other Share Plans

Under the SIP the Company gives eligible employees free shares of up to £3,000 a year. They can also purchase partnership shares for up to
£1,500 a year that are matched 2 for 1 by the Company. The free and matching shares are either purchased at fair value in the market or allotted
from authorised share capital and expensed at the time of allocation.
Under the Sharesave Plans eligible employees can save up to £250 a month over a three or five-year period and use the savings to exercise an
option granted at the outset at a 20% discount to the then prevailing share price. The fair value of the various options is expensed over the service
period, based on a Black-Scholes model.
Awards under the four recruitment schemes are valued at the fair value of the shares at the date of grant and expensed over the period to vesting.
Movements in shares and options are given in note 21.

Other Information

10 Pensions
The British Land Group of Companies Pension Scheme (‘the scheme’) is the principal pension scheme in the Group. It is a defined benefit scheme
which is externally funded and not contracted out of SERPS. The assets of the scheme are held in a trustee-administered fund and kept separate
from those of the Company. It is not planned to admit new employees to the scheme. Existing entitlements will be retained by the members, with
freedom to transfer to a new Defined Contribution Scheme. Contributions to this scheme are at a flat rate of 15% of salary and paid by the
Company. In certain circumstances it may be necessary to pay higher contributions when recruiting senior executives.
The Group has four other small pension schemes. The total net pension cost charged for the year was £4m (2009: £4m), of which £2m (2009: £2m)
relates to defined contribution plans.
A full actuarial valuation of the scheme was carried out at 31 March 2009 by consulting actuaries, Hewitt Associates Ltd. The employer’s
contributions will be paid in the future at the rate recommended by the actuary of 45.2% pa of basic salaries. The best estimate of employer
contributions expected to be paid during the year to 31 March 2010 is £3m. The major assumptions used for the actuarial valuation were:
2010 2009 2008 2007 2006
% pa % pa % pa % pa % pa
Discount rate 5.5 5.8 6.0 5.4 4.9

Salary inflation 5.4 4.4 3.4 5.4 5.2
Pensions increase 3.9 2.9 3.4 3.2 3.0
Price inflation 3.9 2.9 5.6 3.2 3.0
The mortality assumptions are based on standard mortality tables which allow for future mortality improvements. The assumptions are that a
member currently aged 60 will live on average to age 90 if they are male and to age 91 if they are female. For a member who is currently 40 and
retires in 2030 at age 60 the assumptions are that they will live on average for a further 33 years after retirement to age 93 if they are male and
for a further 34 years after retirement to age 94 if they are female.
Composition of scheme assets

Expected Expected
return return
2010/11 2010 2009/10 2009
% £m % £m
Equities 8.5 61 8.0 40

Bonds 5.5 36 4.8 28
Other assets 1.2 1 2.1 1
Total scheme assets 98 69
The amount included in the balance sheet arising from the Group’s obligations in respect of its defined benefit scheme is as follows:
2010 2009 2008 2007 2006

£m £m £m £m £m
Present value of defined scheme obligations (95) (69) (80) (70) (78)
Fair value of scheme assets 98 69 80 79 67
Irrecoverable surplus (3)
Asset (liability) recognised in the balance sheet 9 (11)
British Land Group of companies employs a building block approach in determining the long-term rate of return on pension plan assets.
Historical markets are studied and assets with higher volatility are assumed to generate higher returns consistent with widely accepted capital
market principles. The assumed long-term rate of return on each asset class is set out within this note. The overall expected rate of return on
assets is then derived by aggregating the expected return for each asset class over the actual asset allocation for the Scheme at 31 March 2010.

Our Business
10 Pensions continued
History of experience gains and losses
2010 2009 2008 2007 2006
£m £m £m £m £m
Difference between expected and actual return on scheme assets

Amount 24 (18) (5) 8
Strategy in Action
Percentage of scheme assets 25.1% 26.3% 6.2% 0.4% 12.1%
Experience gains and losses on scheme liabilities
Amount 8 (1) 4 2
Percentage of present value on scheme liabilities 0.3% 1.7% 1.2% 6.1% 1.9%
Changes in assumptions underlying the present value of scheme liabilities (23) 8 (4) 6 (11)
Total actuarial (loss) gain recognised in the consolidated statement of comprehensive income*
Amount† (2) (2) (10) 10 (1)
Percentage of present value on scheme liabilities 1.5% 3.0% 6.2% 14.4% 1.4%
Deferred taxation attributable to pension movements (2)
Pension scheme movement for the year* (2) (2) (10) 8 (1)
Cumulative loss recognised in the consolidated statement of comprehensive income is £21m (2009: £19m).
Performance Review
†
*Movements stated after adjusting for irrecoverability of any surplus.
Movements in the present value of defined benefit obligations were as follows:

2010 2009
£m £m
At 1 April (69) (80)

Current service cost (2) (2)
Interest cost (4) (5)
Actuarial (losses) gains (23) 16
Benefits paid 3 2
At 31 March (95) (69)
Governance
Amounts recognised in the income statement in respect of the defined benefit scheme are:
2010 2009
£m £m
Administrative expenses: Current service cost (2) (2)

Net financing cost: Expected return on scheme assets 5 5
Interest cost (4) (5)
(1) (2)
The actual return on scheme assets was £29m (2009: minus £13m).
Movements in the fair value of the scheme assets were as follows:
2010 2009
£m £m
At 1 April 69 80
Expected return on scheme assets 5 5
Contributions by employer 3 4
Actuarial gains (losses) 24 (18)
Benefits paid (3) (2)
At 31 March 98 69
Other Information

11 Property
Owner-
Investment Development occupied Total
£m £m £m £m
Carrying value at 1 April 2009 5,436 358 30 5,824

Additions – property purchases 76 76
– other capital expenditure 155 155
231 231
Depreciation (1) (1)
Disposals (2,401) (2,401)
Reclassifications 358 (358)
Revaluations included in income statement 526 4 530
Movement in tenant incentives and contracted rent uplift balances (24) (24)
Carrying value at 31 March 2010 4,126 33 4,159
Head lease liabilities (note 16) (7)

Total Group property portfolio valuation 31 March 2010 4,152
At 31 March 2010, the Group valuation of properties of £4,152m (2009: £5,810m) comprises freeholds of £3,053m (2009: £5,189m); virtual freeholds
of £187m (2009: £182m); long leaseholds of £911m (2009: £436m) and short leaseholds of £1m (2009: £3m). The historical cost of properties was
£3,401m (2009: £6,000m).
The property valuation does not include any investment properties held under operating leases (2009: nil).
Properties valued at £2,659m (2009: £3,665m) were subject to a security interest and other properties of non-recourse companies amounted
to £nil (2009: £1m).
Included within the property valuation is £66m (2009: £67m) in respect of accrued contracted rental uplift income, against which the Group
holds a provision of £5m (2009: £25m). The balance arises through the IFRS treatment of leases containing such arrangements, which requires
the recognition of rental income on a straight-line basis over the lease term, with the difference between this and the cash receipt changing
the carrying value of the property against which revaluations are measured.
Cumulative interest capitalised against investment properties amounts to £74m (2009: £102m).
The Group’s total property portfolio was valued by external valuers on the basis of market value, by reference to recent market evidence of
transactions for similar properties, in accordance with the Appraisal and Valuation Standards, sixth edition, published by The Royal Institution
of Chartered Surveyors. A breakdown of valuations split between the Group and its share of joint ventures and funds is shown below:
2010 2009
Joint venture/ Joint venture/

Group funds Total Group funds Total
£m £m £m £m £m £m
Knight Frank LLP 4,136 2,210 6,346 5,793 787 6,580

CB Richard Ellis 15 2,177 2,192 17 1,721 1,738
Directors’ valuations/Savills 1 1 307 307
4,152 4,387 8,539 5,810 2,815 8,625

Our Business
11 Property continued
The prior year movement is shown below:
Owner-
Investment Development occupied Total
£m £m £m £m
Carrying value at 1 April 2008 9,389 1,062 53 10,504
Strategy in Action
Additions – property purchases 126 126
– other capital expenditure 168 271 439
294 271 565
Disposals (2,068) (107) (2,175)
Reclassifications 579 (579)
Revaluations:
included in consolidated income statement (2,729) (245) (20) (2,994)
included in consolidated statement of comprehensive income (44) (3) (47)
Movement in tenant incentives and contracted rent uplift balances (29) (29)
Carrying value at 31 March 2009 5,436 358 30 5,824
Performance Review
Head lease liabilities (note 16) (14)
Total Group property portfolio valuation 31 March 2009 5,810
12 Joint ventures and funds

Summary movement for the year of the investments in joint ventures and funds
Joint ventures Funds Total Equity Loans Total

£m £m £m £m £m £m
At 1 April 2009 580 372 952 899 53 952

Additions 188 50 238 202 36 238
Governance
Disposals (14) (14) (11) (3) (14)
Share of profit after taxation 431 48 479 479 479
Distributions and dividends: capital (7) (7) (7) (7)
revenue (33) (20) (53) (53) (53)
Hedging movements 1 (2) (1) (1) (1)
At 31 March 2010 1,146 448 1,594 1,508 86 1,594
At 31 March 2010, the investment in joint ventures included within the total investment in joint ventures and funds was £1,149m (2009: £585m).
Distributions in the year include the receipt of £13m from HUT, £6m from PREF, £15m (£7m capital) from BL Fraser, £6m from Tesco joint
ventures, and £9m from Meadowhall. At 31 March 2010 the valuation of the Group’s share of joint ventures and funds properties is £4,387m
(2009: £2,815m); external net debt is £2,660m (2009: £1,863m) and the mark to market adjustment for external debt is £177m asset
(2009: £236m asset).
Other Information

12 Joint ventures and funds continued

A detailed breakdown of the 100% results of specific joint ventures and funds is set out on the two facing pages, below and across. The total
column represents the Group’s share of all joint ventures and funds. All disclosures have been restated to British Land accounting policies
under IFRS eliminating performance and management fees and upstream transactions due to the Group.
Joint ventures’ summary financial statements

The Scottish
Bluebutton MSC Property BL Sainsbury Retail Property
Properties Intermediate Superstores Tesco Joint Limited
Ltd Holdings Ltd Ltd Ventures1 Partnership
Partners Blackstone LSP Green Park J Sainsbury plc Tesco plc Land Securities
Group LP funds Property Trust Group PLC
Property sector City Offices Shopping Superstores Superstores/ Shopping
(Broadgate) Centres Retail W’hse Centres
(Meadowhall) Shop Centres (Bon Accord)
Group share 50% 50% 50% 50% 50%
Date established November 2009 February 2009 March 2008 November 1996 March 2004
Accounting period 21 weeks ended Year ended Year ended Year ended Year ended
31 March 2010 31 March 2010 31 March 2010 31 March 2010 31 March 2010
Summarised income statements £m £m £m £m £m

Gross rental and related income 88 87 64 92 18
Net rental and related income 68 73 63 91 10
Other income and expenditure (1) (6) (1) (1) (1)
Net interest – External (42) (42) (34) (56) (7)
– Shareholders
Net interest payable (42) (42) (34) (56) (7)
Underlying profit before taxation 25 25 28 34 2
Surplus on revaluation 282 99 224 201 20
Disposal of fixed assets
Non-recurring items2
Profit on ordinary activities before taxation 307 124 252 235 22
Current tax (2)
Deferred tax
Profit (loss) on ordinary activities after taxation 307 124 252 233 22
Summarised balance sheets £m £m £m £m £m

Investment properties 2,483 1,277 1,188 1,754 206
Development properties
Total properties 2,483 1,277 1,188 1,754 206
Current assets 17 5 2 12 4
Upstream loans to joint venture shareholders 2 15
Cash and deposits 349 23 20 51 3
Gross assets 2,849 1,305 1,212 1,832 213
Current liabilities (131) (34) (30) (130) (23)
Commercial loan from British Land (209)
Bank debt falling due within one year (349)
Bank debt falling due after one year (798)
Securitised debt (1,947) (829) (676) (119)
Convertible loan notes
Other non-current liabilities (3)
Obligations under finance leases (6) (11)
Deferred tax
Gross liabilities (2,287) (872) (706) (1,277) (153)
Net external assets 562 433 506 555 60
Represented by:
Shareholder loans 30 2 59 14
Ordinary shareholders’ funds/Partners’ capital 532 433 504 496 46
Total investment 562 433 506 555 60
Capital commitments 7
Tesco joint ventures include BLT Properties Limited, the first joint venture established in November 1996, the Tesco British Land Property Partnership, Tesco BL Holdings Limited,
1
Shopping Centres Limited and the Tesco Aqua Limited Partnership.

2
Non-recurring items relate to the surplus arising on closing out interest rate derivatives following redemption of the related debt out of the proceeds of property sales.
3
Included in the column headed ‘Other joint ventures and funds’ are contributions from the following: BL Fraser Limited, Fareham Property Partnership, the BL Goodman Limited
Partnership, the Public House Company Limited, BL Gazeley Limited, BL Canada Quay Limited, EFI Zaragoza, the City of London Office Unit Trust (CLOUT), Auchinlea Partnership,
Delavan Spain S.L. and Group adjustments. Amounts are included in this column at the relevant percentage for the Group’s interest.
4
Although ownership has increased during the year to 65.3%, the Group does not exercise control over significant decisions. The Group therefore continues to equity account for its
interest in PREF.

Our Business
12 Joint ventures and funds continued

Funds’ summary financial statements
Strategy in Action
Joint venture Joint venture
Hercules Hercules Pillar Retail Other and fund total and fund total
Unit Income Europark joint ventures3 Group share Group share
Trust Fund Fund and funds 2010 2009

Property sector Retail Retail Retail

Warehouses Warehouses Warehouses
Group share 36.003% 26.12% 65.30%4 At Group Share

Date established September 2000 September 2004 March 2004
Accounting period Year ended Year ended Year ended
31 March 2010 31 March 2010 31 December 2009
Performance Review
Summarised income statements £m £m £m £m £m £m
Gross rental and related income 92 8 32 8 238 159
Net rental and related income 83 8 25 7 208 145
Other income and expenditure (7) (4) 2 (8) (5)
Net interest – External (50) (11) (3) (119) (86)
– Shareholders 1
Net interest payable (50) (11) (3) (119) (85)
Underlying profit before taxation 26 8 10 6 81 55
Surplus (deficit) on revaluation 172 19 (20) (47) 420 (762)
Disposal of fixed assets (31) 8 (2) 3 (8) (71)
Non-recurring items2 (25) (9)
Profit (loss) on ordinary activities before taxation 142 35 (12) (38) 484 (778)
Governance
Current tax (1) (4) (5) 2
Deferred tax 9
Profit (loss) on ordinary activities after taxation 141 35 (12) (42) 479 (767)
Summarised balance sheets £m £m £m £m £m £m

Investment properties 1,528 80 385 119 4,395 2,775
Development properties 49
Total properties 1,528 80 385 119 4,395 2,824
Current assets 25 1 32 44 94 92
Upstream loans to joint venture shareholders 22 31 31
Cash and deposits 156 34 32 18 327 92
Gross assets 1,709 115 449 203 4,847 3,039
Current liabilities (25) (4) (29) (44) (247) (192)
Commercial loan from British Land (105)
Bank debt falling due within one year (15) (179) (207)
Bank debt falling due after one year (259) (69) (637) (525)
Securitised debt (603) (2,002) (1,152)
Convertible loan notes (194) (70)
Other non-current liabilities (1)
Obligations under finance leases (8) (9)
Deferred tax (6) (4) (2)
Gross liabilities (822) (19) (294) (113) (3,253) (2,087)
Net external assets 887 96 155 90 1,594 952
Represented by:
Shareholder loans 20 73 54
Ordinary shareholders’ funds/Partners’ capital 887 96 155 70 1,521 898
Other Information
Total investment 887 96 155 90 1,594 952

Capital commitments 7 2 3 11 12
These financial statements include the results and financial position of the Group’s interest in the Tesco British Land Property Partnership, the Tesco Aqua Limited Partnership,
the Scottish Retail Property Limited Partnership, the Fareham Property Partnership, the BL Goodman Limited Partnership, Auchinlea Partnership and the BL Residential Limited
Partnership. Accordingly, advantage has been taken of the exemptions provided by Regulation 7 of the Partnerships and Unlimited Companies (Accounts) Regulations 1993, not to
attach the partnership accounts to these financial statements.
All joint ventures are non-recourse to the Group. Where a joint venture has net liabilities, as required under IFRS, the Group does not account for its share of the deficit in its total share
of joint venture profits. All joint ventures are incorporated in the United Kingdom, with the exception of Eurofund Investments Zaragoza SL which is domiciled in Spain. Of the funds,
HUT and HIF are domiciled in Jersey, and PREF in Luxembourg.

13 Other non-current assets

2010 2009
Other Intangible Other Intangible

investments assets investments assets
£m £m £m £m
At 1 April 2009 38 25 196 39

Additions 252
Disposals (16)
Depreciation (1) (1)
Amortisation (15) (14)
At 31 March 2010 261 10 38 25
Other investments include the £209m secured commercial loan to Bluebutton Properties Ltd (the parent company of the Broadgate joint venture).
In the prior year other investments included £28m relating to the Group’s 17.8% interest in Songbird Estates plc which was disposed of in the
current year.
Intangible assets relate to fund management contracts which are amortised over the expected remaining life of each contract, which ranged
from six to 10 years at acquisition. The original fair value was £79m with accumulated amortisation at 31 March 2010 being £69m (2009: £54m).
14 Debtors
2010 2009
£m £m
Trade and other debtors1 85 103

Prepayments and accrued income 9 4
Interest rate derivatives2 11 16
105 123
Included within this balance is deferred consideration of £42m (2009: £43m) arising on the sale of investment properties for which the timing of the receipt is contingent and therefore
1
may fall due after one year.

Includes contracted cash flow with a maturity greater than one year at fair value.
2
Trade and other debtors are shown after deducting a provision for bad and doubtful debts of £7m (2009: £6m). The charge to the income statement
was £2m (2009: £3m).
The directors consider that the carrying amount of trade and other debtors approximates their fair value. There is no concentration of credit risk
with respect to trade debtors as the Group has a large number of customers, who are paying their rental in advance.
As at 31 March, trade and other debtors outside their payment terms yet not provided for are as follows:
Outside credit terms but not impaired
Within credit More than

Total terms 0-1 month 1-2 months 2 months
£m £m £m £m £m
2010 85 70 14 1
2009 103 80 18 1 4
15 Creditors
2010 2009
£m £m
Trade creditors 104 129

Amounts owed to joint ventures 40 33
Corporation tax 23 40
Other taxation and social security 11 11
Accruals and deferred income 105 202
Interest rate derivatives1 49 109
332 524
1
Trade payables are interest free and have settlement dates within one year. The directors consider that the carrying amount of trade and other
payables approximates their fair value.

Our Business
16 Other non-current liabilities
2010 2009
£m £m
Trade and other creditors 19 27

Obligations under finance leases 7 14
Minority interest 4 4
Strategy in Action
30 45
17 Deferred taxation
Deferred tax is calculated on temporary differences under the liability method using a tax rate of 28% (2009: 28%) as described in note 8.
The movement on deferred tax is as shown below:

Charged
1 April (credited) Charged 31 March
2009 to income to reserves 2010
£m £m £m £m
Property and investment revaluations 23 16 39

Other timing differences 4 4
Performance Review
Intangible assets 8 (4) 4
35 12 47
1 April Credited Credited 31 March

2008 to income to reserves 2009
£m £m £m £m
Property and investment revaluations 93 (46) (24) 23

Other timing differences 4 4
Intangible assets 11 (3) 8
108 (49) (24) 35
Governance
Under the REIT regime development properties which are sold within three years of completion do not benefit from tax exemption. At 31 March
2010 the value of such properties is £1,108m (2009: £1,066m) and if these properties were to be sold the tax arising would be £nil (2009: £nil).
Other Information

18 Net debt
2010 2009
Footnote £m £m
Secured on the assets of the Group

Class A4 4.821% Bonds 2036 1.1 396
Class C2 5.098% Bonds 2035 1.1 217
Class B 4.999% Bonds 2033 1.1 365
Class A3 4.851% Bonds 2033 1.1 174
Class A1 Floating Rate Bonds 2032 1.1 224
Class A2 4.949% Bonds 2031 1.1 288
Class D Floating Rate Bonds 2025 1.1 112
Class C1 Floating Rate Bonds 2022 1.1 215
5.264% First Mortgage Debenture Bonds 2035 327 327
5.0055% First Mortgage Amortising Debentures 2035 103 104
9.125% First Mortgage Debenture Stock 2020 1.2 39 40
Floating Rate Secured Loan Notes 2035 256 256
Loan Notes 5 5
1,426 3,420
Unsecured
5.50% Senior Notes 2027 98 98
6.30% Senior US Dollar Notes 2015 2 101 108
355 345
Gross debt 3 1,781 3,765
Interest rate derivatives: liabilities (see note 15) 49 109
Interest rate derivatives: assets (see note 14) (11) (16)
1,819 3,858
Liquid investments
4.405% Medium Term Note 2015 (98)
(195)
Cash and short-term deposits 4 (74) (616)
Net debt 1,550 3,242
Total borrowings where any instalments are due after five years are £106m (2009: £1,702m).
1 These borrowings are obligations of ring-fenced, special purpose companies, with no recourse to other companies or assets in the Group:
2010 2009
£m £m
1.1 Broadgate Financing PLC (sold into a joint venture with Blackstone Group LP funds on 3 November 2009) 1,991
1.2 BLD Property Holdings Ltd 125 127
2 Principal and interest on this borrowing was fully hedged into Sterling at the time of issue.
3 The principal amount of gross debt at 31 March 2010 was £1,767m (2009: £3,746m). Included in this, the principal amount of secured borrowings
and other borrowings of non-recourse companies was £1,415m (2009: £3,412m).
4 Cash and deposits not subject to a security interest amount to £66m (2009: £215m).

Our Business
18 Net debt continued
Maturity analysis of net debt
2010 2009
£m £m
Repayable: within one year and on demand 139 49

between: one and two years 297 148
Strategy in Action
two and five years 170 439
five and ten years 313 553
ten and fifteen years 42 436
fifteen and twenty years 441 835
twenty and twenty-five years 6 930
twenty-five and thirty years 373 375
1,642 3,716
Gross debt 1,781 3,765
Interest rate derivatives 38 93
Liquid investments (195)
Performance Review
Cash and short-term deposits (74) (616)
Net debt 1,550 3,242
Financial covenants
The two financial covenants applicable to the Group unsecured debt are:
Net Borrowings not to exceed 175% of Adjusted Capital and Reserves

At 31 March 2010 the ratio is 37%:
> Net Borrowings are £1,756m, being the principal amount of gross debt of £1,767m plus amounts owed to joint ventures of £40m and TPP
Investments Ltd of £23m (see note 24), less the cash and short-term deposits of £74m; and
> Adjusted Capital and Reserves are £4,741m, being share capital and reserves of £4,208m (see Consolidated Statement of Changes in Equity),
Governance
adjusted for £43m of deferred tax (see note 2), £364m exceptional refinancing charges (see below) and £126m mark to market on interest rate
swaps (see note 2).
Net Unsecured Borrowings not to exceed 70% of Unencumbered Assets

At 31 March 2010 the ratio is 14%:
> Net Unsecured Borrowings are £326m, being the principal amount of gross debt of £1,767m plus amounts owed to joint ventures of £40m less
cash and deposits not subject to a security interest of £66m less the principal amount of secured and non-recourse borrowings of £1,415m; and
> Unencumbered Assets are £2,394m being properties of £4,152m (see note 11) plus investments in joint ventures and funds of £1,594m (see note 12)
and other investments of £456m (see balance sheet: liquid investments of £195m and other investments of £261m) less investments in joint
ventures of £1,149m (see footnote to note 12, page 101) and Encumbered Assets of £2,659m (see note 11).
In calculating Adjusted Capital and Reserves for the purpose of the unsecured debt financial covenants, there is an adjustment of £364m to reflect
the cumulative net amortised exceptional items relating to the refinancings in the years ending 31 March 2005, 2006 and 2007.
Other Information


Reconciliation of movement in Group Net Debt to Cash Flow Statement
1 Apr Non-cash 31 Mar
2009 Disposals† Cash flow movement 2010
£m £m £m £m £m
Per cash flow statement:

Cash and short-term deposits (616) 542 (74)
Overdrafts 2 2
Cash and cash equivalents (616) 544 (72)
Term debt (excluding overdrafts) 3,765 (1,970) 1 (17) 1,779

Fair value of interest rate derivatives 93 (47) (8) 38
Liquid investments (200) 5 (195)
Net debt 3,242 (2,017) 345 (20) 1,550
1 Apr Non-cash 31 Mar

2008 Disposals† Cash flow movement 2009
£m £m £m £m £m
Per cash flow statement:

Cash and short-term deposits (244) (372) (616)
Overdrafts 5 (5)
Cash and cash equivalents (239) (377) (616)
Term debt (excluding overdrafts) 5,257 (835) (714) 57 3,765

Fair value of interest rate derivatives 14 79 93
Net debt 5,032 (835) (1,091) 136 3,242
†
Excluding cash and overdrafts. Represents the principal of securitised debt in Bluebutton Properties Limited on formation of the joint venture (2009: MSC Property Intermediate
Holdings Ltd).
Comparison of market values and book values

2010 2009
Market Book Market Book

value value Difference value value Difference
£m £m £m £m £m £m
Securitisations 1,383 1,991 (608)

Debentures and unsecured bonds 1,256 1,364 (108) 1,091 1,374 (283)
Bank debt and other floating rate debt 417 417 400 400
Cash and short-term deposits (74) (74) (616) (616)
1,599 1,707 (108) 2,258 3,149 (891)
Liquid investments (195) (195)

Other financial (assets) liabilities:
– interest rate derivative assets (11) (11) (16) (16)
– interest rate derivative liabilities 49 49 109 109
(157) (157) 93 93
Total 1,442 1,550 (108) 2,351 3,242 (891)
The carrying values of trade debtors, other investments, trade creditors, finance leases and amounts owed to joint ventures represent their fair
values at the balance sheet date. These financial instruments are excluded from the above analysis.
The fair values of securitised debt and debentures have been established by obtaining quoted market prices from brokers. The bank debt and loan
notes have been valued assuming they could be renegotiated at contracted margins. The derivatives have been valued by calculating the present
value of expected future cash flows, using appropriate market discount rates, by an independent treasury adviser.

Our Business
Fair value hierarchy
The table below analyses financial instruments carried at fair value, by valuation method. The different levels are defined as follows:
Level 1: quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities.
Level 2: inputs other than quoted prices included within Level 1 that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly (i.e., as prices)
Strategy in Action
or indirectly (i.e. derived from prices)
Level 3: inputs for the asset or liability that are not based on observable market data (unobservable inputs).
2010
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Total

£m £m £m £m
Liquid investments (195) (195)

Interest rate derivative assets (11) (11)
Assets (206) (206)
Interest rate derivative liabilities 49 49
Performance Review
Liabilities 49 49
Total (157) (157)
Categories of financial instruments

2010 2009
Book value Book value
£m £m
Financial assets
Fair value through income statement
Held for trading – liquid investments 195
Governance
Derivatives in designated hedge accounting relationships 11 16
Loans and receivables

Trade and other debtors 85 103
Cash and short-term deposits 74 616
Other investments 261
Available for sale investments

Other investments 38
626 773
Financial liabilities
Fair value through income statement
Held for trading – derivatives (4) (3)
Derivatives in designated hedge accounting relationships (45) (106)
Amortised cost
Gross debt (1,781) (3,765)
Finance lease payable (7) (14)
Trade and other creditors (123) (156)
Amounts owed to joint ventures (40) (33)

Other Information
(2,000) (4,077)
Total (1,374) (3,304)
Gains and losses on financial instruments, as classed above, are disclosed in note 7 (net financing costs), note 14 (debtors), note 6 (net revaluation
gains (losses) on property and investments), the consolidated income statement and the consolidated statement of comprehensive income.


Capital risk management
The Group’s objectives, policies and processes for managing capital are set out in the financing policy and practice on pages 32 and 35. The capital
structure of the Group consists of net debt and equity attributable to the equity holders of The British Land Company PLC, comprising issued
capital, reserves and retained earnings.
Interest rate risk management

The Group uses interest rate swaps to hedge exposure to the variability in cash flows on floating rate debt, such as revolving bank facilities,
floating rate bonds and floating rate investments, caused by movements in market rates of interest. At 31 March 2010 the market value of these
derivatives, which have been designated as cash flow hedges under IAS 39, is a net liability of £39m (2009: liability of £106m). The valuation
movement reflects primarily the creation of the Broadgate joint venture. At 31 March 2009 the three derivatives within the Broadgate securitisation
had a net liability market value of £56m. These derivatives are no longer held at a Group level.
The cross currency swap, which fully hedges the foreign exchange exposure on the US Private Placement, has been designated as a cash flow
hedge. The market value of this is an asset of £5m (2009: asset of £16m).
The ineffectiveness recognised in the income statement on cash flow hedges in the year ended 31 March 2010 was £1m (2009: £119m realisation
of cash flow hedges).
The cash flows occur and enter into the determination of profit and loss until the maturity of the hedged debt and floating rate investments.
The table below summarises foreign currency denominated debt, variable rate debt and investments hedged at 31 March 2010.
Cash flow hedged debt and floating rate investments

2010 2009
£m £m
Outstanding: after one year 781 1,001

after two years 881 1,064
after five years 431 1,002
after ten years 250 434
The Group uses interest rate swaps to hedge exposure on fixed rate financial liabilities caused by movements in market rates of interest. At 31
March 2010 the market value of these derivatives, which have been designated as fair value hedges under IAS 39, is a net asset of £1m (2009: £nil).
Interest rate profile – including effect of derivatives

2010 2009
£m £m
Fixed rate 1,245 3,879

Variable rate (net of cash) 305 (637)
Net debt 1,550 3,242
All the debt is effectively Sterling denominated except for £154m (2009: £139m) of Euro debt of which £134m is at a fixed rate and the balance is
floating (2009: £139m fixed). At 31 March 2010 the weighted average interest rate of the Sterling fixed rate debt is 5.58% (2009: 5.23%). The weighted
average period for which the rate is fixed is 19.7 years (2009: 17.5 years). The weighted average interest rate for the Euro fixed rate debt is 4.52%
(2009: 4.56%) and the weighted average period for which the rate is fixed is 6.1 years (2009: 7.1 years). The floating rate debt is set for periods of
the Company’s choosing at the relevant LIBOR (or similar) rate.

Our Business
The proportion of net debt at fixed or capped rates of interest was 80% at 31 March 2010. Based on the Group’s interest rate profile at the balance
sheet date a 576 basis point increase in interest rates would decrease annual profits by £18m (2009: £37m increase). Similarly, a 576 basis point
reduction would increase profits by £2m (2009: £11m reduction). The change in interest rates used for this sensitivity analysis is based on the
largest annual change in three month Sterling LIBOR over the last 10 years.
Strategy in Action
Upward movements in medium and long-term interest rates, associated with higher interest rate expectations, increase the value of the Group’s
interest rate swaps that provide protection against such moves. The converse is true for downward movements in the yield curve. The Group’s
interest rate swaps qualify as effective hedges under IAS 39, with one exception which is classified as held for trading, therefore movements in
their fair value are recognised directly in equity rather than the income statement. A 204 basis point shift represents the largest annual change
in the seven year Sterling swap rate over the last 10 years. At 31 March 2010 a 204 basis point parallel upward shift in swap rates would increase
the value of the Group’s interest rate swaps by £73m (2009: £169m). A 204 basis point downward shift in swap rates would reduce the value
of the interest rate swap portfolio by £118m (2009: £236m). Because the interest rate swaps are matched by floating rate debt, and floating rate
investments, the overall effect on Group cash flows of such movements is minimal.
Foreign currency risk management

Group policy is to have no material unhedged net assets or liabilities denominated in foreign currencies. The currency risk on overseas investments
Performance Review
is hedged via foreign currency denominated borrowings and derivatives. The Group has adopted net investment hedging in accordance with IAS 39
and therefore the portion of the gain or loss on the hedging instrument that is determined to be an effective hedge is recognised directly in equity.
The ineffective portion of the gain or loss on the hedging instrument is recognised immediately in the income statement.
The table below shows the carrying amounts of the Group’s foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities. Provided contingent tax on
overseas investments is not expected to occur it will be ignored for hedging purposes, as will the requirement to fair value interest rate swaps.
This explains the excess of Euro denominated liabilities over assets. Based on the 31 March 2010 position a 33% appreciation (largest annual
change over the last 10 years) in the Euro relative to Sterling would result in a £6m reduction (2009: £4m reduction) in reported profits.
Assets Liabilities
2010 2009 2010 2009

£m £m £m £m
Governance
Euro denominated 136 126 154 139
Credit risk management

The carrying amount of financial assets recorded in the financial statements represents the Group’s maximum exposure to credit risk without
taking account of the value of any collateral obtained.
Cash and short-term deposits at 31 March 2010 amounted to £74m (2009: £616m). Deposits were placed with financial institutions with A or better
credit ratings.
At 31 March 2010 the fair value of all interest rate derivatives which had a positive value was £11m (2009: £16m).
At 31 March 2010 the fair value of liquid investments was £195m (2009: Nil).
At 31 March 2010, prior to taking into account any offset arrangements, the largest combined credit exposure to a single counterparty arising from
money market deposits, liquid investments and interest rate swaps was £150m (2009: £245m). This represents 2.3% (2009: under 3.2%) of gross assets.
The deposits and liquid investments exposures are with UK high street banks.
The Group’s exposure to credit risk in respect of its trade receivables is analysed in note 14. Included within trade and other debtors is deferred
consideration of £55m, of which £42m may fall due after one year. Management has made due consideration of the credit risk associated with this,
resulting in no impairment for credit risk being made.
Other Information


Liquidity risk management
The Group’s approach to liquidity risk management is discussed in the financing policy and practice on pages 32 and 35.
The table below presents a maturity profile of the contracted undiscounted cash flows of financial liabilities based on the earliest date on which
the Group can be required to pay. The table includes both interest and principal flows. Where the interest payable is not fixed, the amount disclosed
has been determined by reference to the projected interest rates implied by yield curves at the reporting date. For derivative financial instruments
that settle on a net basis (e.g. interest rate swaps) the undiscounted net cash flows are shown and for derivatives that require gross settlement
(e.g. cross currency swaps) the undiscounted gross cash flows are presented. Where payment obligations are in foreign currencies, the spot
exchange rate ruling at the balance sheet date is used. Trade creditors and amounts owed to joint ventures, which are repayable within one year,
have been excluded from the analysis.
The Group expects to meet its financial liabilities through the various available liquidity sources, including a secure rental income profile, asset
sales, undrawn committed borrowing facilities and, in the longer term, debt refinancings.
The Group leases out all its investment properties under operating leases with a weighted average lease length of 13 years. This secure income
profile is generated from upward only rent reviews, long leases and high occupancy rates. The future aggregate minimum rentals receivable
under non-cancellable operating leases is also shown in the table below. Income from joint ventures and funds is not included below. Additional
liquidity will arise from letting space in properties under construction as well as from distributions received from joint ventures and funds.
2010
Within one year Following year Two to five years Over five years Total
£m £m £m £m £m
Debt† 136 294 166 1,174 1,770

Interest on debt 85 78 218 803 1,184
Derivative payments 20 20 40 115 195
Finance lease payments 1 1 1 80 83
Total payments 242 393 425 2,172 3,232
Derivative receipts (11) (8) (19) (116) (154)
Net payment 231 385 406 2,056 3,078
Operating leases with tenants (see note 19) 224 222 685 2,685 3,816
Liquidity (deficit) surplus (7) (163) 279 629 738
Cumulative liquidity (deficit) surplus (7) (170) 109 738
2009
Within one year Following year Two to five years Over five years Total
£m £m £m £m £m
Debt† 46 145 436 3,129 3,756

Interest on debt 169 174 494 2,052 2,889
Derivative payments 37 30 52 159 278
Finance lease payments 1 1 3 108 113
Total payments 253 350 985 5,448 7,036
Derivative receipts (7) (7) (20) (124) (158)
Net payment 246 343 965 5,324 6,878
Operating leases with tenants (see note 19) 382 383 1,125 3,602 5,492
Liquidity surplus (deficit) 136 40 160 (1,722) (1,386)
Cumulative liquidity surplus (deficit) 136 176 336 (1,386)
†
ross debt of £1,781m (2009: £3,765m) represents the total shown, less unamortised issue costs of £9m (2009: £17m), plus the fair value adjustment arising on acquisitions of £20m
G
(2009: £26m).

Our Business
The short-term liquidity gap between the net payments required and the rentals receivable can be met through other liquidity sources available
to the Group. The Group currently holds cash and short-term deposits of £74m, of which £66m is not subject to a security interest (see footnote 4
to net debt table) and liquid investments of £195m. Further liquidity can be achieved through sales of property assets or investments and debt
refinancings. The Group’s property portfolio is valued externally at £4,152m (see note 11) and the share of joint ventures and funds’ property is
valued at £4,387m (see Table A). The undrawn committed borrowing facilities available to the Group are a further source of liquidity. The maturity
Strategy in Action
profile of committed undrawn borrowing facilities is shown below.
Maturity of committed undrawn borrowing facilities

2010 2009
£m £m
Expiring: within one year 245 89

two and three years 80 775
three and four years 905 80
four and five years 781 905
over five years 75 836
Performance Review
Total 2,861 2,950
The above facilities are those freely available to be drawn for Group purposes.
19 Leasing
Operating leases with tenants
The Group leases out all of its investment properties under operating leases with a weighted average lease length of 13 years. The future aggregate
minimum rentals receivable under non-cancellable operating leases are as follows:
2010 2009
£m £m
Less than one year 224 382
Governance
Between two and five years 907 1,508
Between six and ten years 1,071 1,552
Between eleven and fifteen years 741 850
Between sixteen and twenty years 461 470
After twenty years 412 730
3,816 5,492
Contingent rents of £1m (2009: £3m) were recognised in the year.
The Group’s leasehold investment properties are typically under non-renewable leases without significant restrictions. Finance lease liabilities are
payable as follows, no contingent rents are payable in either period:
2010 2009
Minimum Minimum
lease lease
payments Interest Principal payments Interest Principal
£m £m £m £m £m £m
British Land Group

Less than one year 1 1 1 1
Between one and two years 1 1 1 1
Between two and five years 1 1 3 3
More than five years 80 73 7 108 94 14
83 76 7 113 99 14
Other Information

20 Dividend
The proposed fourth interim dividend of 6.5 pence per share, totalling £57m (2009: 6.5 pence per share, totalling £55m) was approved by the
Board on 13 May 2010 and is payable on 13 August 2010 to shareholders on the register at the close of business on 9 July 2010. An enhanced
scrip alternative is to be offered to shareholders with the fourth interim dividend.
This dividend will be entirely a ‘normal’ dividend i.e. not a PID (Property Income Distribution). PID dividends are paid, as required by REIT
legislation, after deduction of withholding tax at the basic rate (currently 20%). However, certain classes of shareholder may be able to claim
exemption from deduction of withholding tax. Please refer to our website (www.britishland.com) for details.
Payment Pence 2010 2009

date Dividend per share £m £m
Current year dividends

13.08.2010 2010 4th interim 6.50
14.05.2010 2010 3rd interim 6.50
12.02.2010 2010 2nd interim 6.50 56
13.11.2009 2010 1st interim 6.50 56
26.00
Prior year dividends
14.08.2009 2009 4th interim 6.50 55
15.05.2009 2009 3rd interim* 7.77 48
13.02.2009 2009 2nd interim* 7.76 47
14.11.2008 2009 1st interim* 7.77 48
29.80
15.08.2008 2008 Final* 7.25 45
19.05.2008 2008 3rd interim* 7.25 45
Dividends in reconciliation of movement in shareholders’ funds 215 185
Dividends settled in shares (63)
Dividends settled in cash 152 185
Timing difference relating to payment of withholding tax 2 3
Dividends in cash flow statement 154 188
*Dividends per share was restated in the prior year to take account of the bonus element of the increased number of shares due to the March 2009 rights issue.
21 Share capital and reserves

2010 2009
Number of ordinary shares in issue at 1 April 863,450,216 522,190,080

Share issues 15,976,886 341,260,136
Number of ordinary shares in issue at 31 March 879,427,102 863,450,216
At 31 March 2010 the authorised share capital is 1,440,000,000 25p ordinary shares (2009: 887,000,000).
At 31 March 2010 of the issued 25p ordinary shares, 1,830,208 were held in the ESOP trust (2009: 2,040,620 ), 11,266,245 shares were held as
treasury shares (2009: 11,266,245) and 866,330,649 shares were in free issue (2009: 850,143,351). No treasury shares were acquired by the ESOP
during the year. All issued shares are fully paid.
Hedging and translation reserve

The hedging and translation reserve comprises the effective portion of the cumulative net change in the fair value of cash flow and foreign
currency hedging instruments, as well as all foreign exchange differences arising from the translation of the financial statements of foreign
operations. The foreign exchange differences also include the translation of the liabilities that hedge the Company’s net investment in a
foreign subsidiary.
Revaluation reserve
The revaluation reserve relates to owner-occupied properties and investments in joint ventures and funds.

Our Business
21 Share capital and reserves continued
Merger reserve
This comprises the premium on shares issued to acquire Springboard Capital (Jersey) Limited under the arrangement for the rights issue in
March 2009. No share premium was recorded in the Company’s financial statements through the operation of the merger relief provisions of the
Companies Act 1985, which was the legislation at that time. The subsequent redemption of these shares gave rise to distributable profits of £682m,
which have been transferred to retained earnings.
Strategy in Action
At 31 March 2010, options over 11,279,205 ordinary shares were outstanding under employee share option plans. These options had a weighted
average life of eight years. Details of outstanding share options and shares awarded to employees including executive directors are set out below
and on the following page:
At At Exercise Exercise dates
Date 1 Apr 31 Mar price
of grant 2009 Granted Exercised Forfeits 2010 pence From To
Share options
Sharesave Scheme
01.03.04 12,154 (10,534) (1,620) 391.09 01.03.09 31.08.09
01.03.05 42,214 (31,138) 11,076 536.92 01.03.10 31.08.10
23.06.05 260 (260) 580.83 01.09.08 28.02.09
Performance Review
23.06.05 3,181 (2,500) 681 580.83 01.09.10 28.02.11
22.12.05 13,133 (13,133) 666.18 01.03.09 31.08.09
22.12.05 8,258 (2,946) 5,312 666.18 01.03.11 31.08.11
03.07.06 8,911 (8,911) 834.38 01.09.09 28.02.10
03.07.06 1,346 (1,155) 191 834.38 01.09.11 29.02.12
22.12.06 5,940 (3,900) 2,040 1024.12 01.03.10 31.08.10
22.12.06 1,272 (126) 1,146 1024.12 01.03.12 31.08.12
02.07.07 3,761 (2,030) 1,731 929.66 01.09.10 28.02.11
02.07.07 2,534 (2,534) 929.66 01.09.12 28.02.13
30.06.08 61,536 (53,265) 8,271 517.03 01.09.11 29.02.12
30.06.08 56,254 (44,000) 12,254 517.03 01.09.13 28.02.14
30.06.09 215,920 (416) (14,674) 200,830 301.00 01.09.12 28.02.13
Governance
30.06.09 176,296 (3,099) 173,197 301.00 01.09.14 28.02.15
220,754 392,216 (10,950) (185,291) 416,729
Long-Term Incentive Plan – options vested, not exercised
25.09.03 119,455 119,455 415.95 25.09.06 24.09.13
25.11.03 137,897 (6,014) (2,715) 129,168 457.38 25.11.06 24.11.13
28.05.04 468,002 (38,149) 429,853 549.35 28.05.07 27.05.14
29.11.04 586,647 (39,980) 546,667 659.55 29.11.07 28.11.14
31.05.05 492,088 (23,628) 468,460 726.66 31.05.08 30.05.15
05.12.05 310,794 (35,973) 274,821 823.60 05.12.08 04.12.15
30.05.06 31,890 (31,890) 1037.38 30.05.09 29.05.16
14.07.06 9,684 (9,684) 1090.40 14.07.09 13.07.16
29.11.06 2,009 (2,009) 1280.15 29.11.09 28.11.16
2,158,466 (6,014) (184,028) 1,968,424
Long-Term Incentive Plan – unvested options
30.05.06 495,411 (495,411) 1037.38 30.05.09 29.05.16
14.07.06 166,020 (166,020) 1090.40 14.07.09 13.07.16
29.11.06 142,326 (142,326) 1280.15 29.11.09 28.11.16
27.06.07 328,948 (82,279) 246,669 1099.52 27.06.10 26.06.17
20.12.07 477,718 (98,867) 378,851 731.63 20.12.10 19.12.17
29.05.08 1,872,153 (434,110) 1,438,043 666.18 29.05.11 29.05.18
02.12.08 1,193,753 (269,003) 924,750 420.09 02.12.11 01.12.18
29.06.09 5,940,996 (1,185,815) 4,755,181 387.00 29.06.12 28.06.19
Other Information
25.11.09 33,746 33,746 475.00 25.11.12 24.11.19

21.12.09 1,153,211 (36,399) 1,116,812 446.00 21.12.12 20.12.19
4,676,329 7,127,953 (2,910,230) 8,894,052
Total 7,055,549 7,520,169 (16,964) (3,279,549) 11,279,205
Weighted average exercise price of options (p) 692 392 412 659 502

21 Share capital and reserves continued

At At Share price
Date 1 Apr 31 Mar at grant date Vesting
of grant 2009 Granted Vested Forfeits 2010 pence date
Shares
Long-Term Incentive Plan – performance shares
05.12.05 596 (577) (19) 823.60 05.12.08
30.05.06 197,339 (197,339) 1037.38 30.05.09
29.11.06 155,456 (155,456) 1090.40 29.11.09
27.06.07 202,341 (66,415) 135,926 1280.15 27.06.10
20.12.07 91,479 (19,997) 71,482 731.63 20.12.10
29.05.08 408,631 (158,776) 249,855 666.18 29.05.11
02.12.08 172,491 (49,598) 122,893 420.09 02.12.11
29.06.09 651,279 (83,274) 568,005 387.00 29.06.12
25.11.09 11,467 11,467 475.00 25.11.12
21.12.09 169,154 (7,280) 161,874 446.00 21.12.12
1,228,333 831,900 (577) (738,154) 1,321,502
Fund Managers Performance Plan
14.07.06 264,138 (264,138) 1095.04 14.07.09
30.05.07 140,854 (140,854) 1182.37 30.05.09
30.05.07 140,862 (93,568) 47,294 1182.37 30.05.10
14.08.08 521,874 (41,673) (426,017) 54,184 619.77 14.08.11
17.06.09 859,662 (335,270) 524,392 395.50 17.06.12
1,067,728 859,662 (446,665) (854,855) 625,870
Co-Investment Share Plans
04.03.09 242,500 242,500 330.50 12.01.12
30.03.10 53,517 53,517 478.50 01.02.13
31.03.10 85,328 85,328 481.10 04.01.13
242,500 138,845 381,345
Restricted Share Plan
30.03.10 116,877 116,877 470.58 01.02.11
30.03.10 53,125 53,125 470.58 01.02.12
170,002 170,002
Matching Share Plan
14.07.06 46,732 (46,732) 1068.86 14.07.09
22.05.07 82,824 (31,068) 51,756 1195.63 22.05.10
20.05.08 153,178 (54,778) 98,400 667.83 20.05.11
21.05.09 227,336 (88,396) 138,940 391.00 21.05.12
282,734 227,336 (46,732) (174,242) 289,096
Total 2,821,295 2,227,745 (493,974) (1,767,251) 2,787,815
Weighted average price of shares (p) 823 408 1,077 708 519

Our Business
22 Segment information
Operating segments
The Group allocates resources to investment and asset management according to the sectors it expects to perform over the medium term. Its two
principal sectors are currently offices and retail. The relevant revenue, net rental income, assets and capital expenditure, being the measures of
profit or loss and total assets used by the management of the business, are set out below:
Strategy in Action
Offices Retail Other Total
2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009

£m £m £m £m £m £m £m £m
Revenue 194 278 187 268 26 26 407 572

Net rental income 143 230 175 206 19 17 337 453
Segment assets 1,791 3,572 3,753 3,012 854 976 6,398 7,560
Capital expenditure 165 383 56 170 10 12 231 565
Revenue is derived from the rental of buildings, fund management and performance fees and investments. Corporate costs, including
administrative and interest expenses, are not allocated to the segments shown, therefore a sectoral profit or loss is not disclosed. Segment assets
include the Group’s investment in joint ventures and funds. No customer exceeds 10% of the Group’s revenues.
Performance Review
23 Capital commitments
The aggregate capital commitments to purchase, construct or develop investment property, for repairs, maintenance or enhancements, or for the
purchase of investments which are contracted for but not provided, are set out below:
2010 2009
£m £m
British Land 25 224

Share of joint ventures (note 12) 7 7
Share of funds (note 12) 4 5
36 236
Governance
24 Contingent liabilities
TPP Investments Limited, a wholly-owned ring-fenced special purpose subsidiary, is a partner in The Tesco British Land Property Partnership
and, in that capacity, has entered into a secured bank loan under which its liability is limited to £23m (2009: £23m) and recourse is only to the
partnership assets.
25 Related party transactions

Details of transactions with joint ventures and funds including debt guarantees by the Group are given in notes 4 and 24. During the year the Group
recognised performance and management fees receivable from funds of £4m (2009: £10m), joint venture management fees of £3m (2009: £4m)
and interest earned on the commercial loan to Bluebutton Properties Ltd of £3m (2009: £nil), see note 7.
Other Information

REPORT OF THE AUDITORS
Independent Auditors’ Report to the Members of The British Land Opinion on financial statements
Company PLC In our opinion the Group financial statements:
We have audited the group financial statements of The British Land > give a true and fair view of the state of the Group’s affairs
Company PLC for the year ended 31 March 2010 which comprise as at 31 March 2010 and of its profit for the year then ended;
the consolidated income statement, consolidated balance sheet, > have been properly prepared in accordance with IFRSs as
consolidated statement of comprehensive income, consolidated adopted by the European Union; and
statement of cash flows, consolidated statement of changes in equity, > have been prepared in accordance with the requirements of
and the related notes 1 to 25. The financial reporting framework the Companies Act 2006 and Article 4 of the IAS Regulation.
that has been applied in their preparation is applicable law and
International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRSs) as adopted Opinion on other matter prescribed by the Companies Act 2006
by the European Union. In our opinion the information given in the Directors’ Report for the
financial year for which the financial statements are prepared is
This report is made solely to the Company’s members, as a body,
consistent with the Group financial statements.
in accordance with Chapter 3 of Part 16 of the Companies Act 2006.
Our audit work has been undertaken so that we might state to the
Matters on which we are required to report by exception
Company’s members those matters we are required to state to them
We have nothing to report in respect of the following:
in an auditors’ report and for no other purpose. To the fullest extent
permitted by law, we do not accept or assume responsibility to anyone Under the Companies Act 2006 we are required to report to you if,
other than the Company and the Company’s members as a body, in our opinion:
for our audit work, for this report, or for the opinions we have formed. > certain disclosures of directors’ remuneration specified by law
are not made; or
Respective responsibilities of directors and auditors > we have not received all the information and explanations we
As explained more fully in the Directors’ Responsibilities Statement, require for our audit.
the directors are responsible for the preparation of the Group financial
Under the Listing Rules we are required to review:
statements and for being satisfied that they give a true and fair
> the directors’ statement contained within the Corporate Governance
view. Our responsibility is to audit the Group financial statements
Section in relation to going concern; and
in accordance with applicable law and International Standards on
> the part of the Corporate Governance Statement relating to the
Auditing (UK and Ireland). Those standards require us to comply with
company’s compliance with the nine provisions of the June 2008
the Auditing Practices Board’s (APB’s) Ethical Standards for Auditors.
Combined Code specified for our review.
Scope of the audit of the financial statements

Other matter
An audit involves obtaining evidence about the amounts and
We have reported separately on the parent company financial
disclosures in the financial statements sufficient to give reasonable
statements of The British Land Company PLC for the year ended
assurance that the financial statements are free from material
31 March 2010 and on the information in the Directors’ Remuneration
misstatement, whether caused by fraud or error. This includes an
Report that is described as having been audited.
assessment of: whether the accounting policies are appropriate to
the Group’s circumstances and have been consistently applied and
adequately disclosed; the reasonableness of significant accounting
estimates made by the directors; and the overall presentation of the
financial statements. Simon Letts BA FCA (Senior Statutory Auditor)
for and on behalf of Deloitte LLP
Chartered Accountants and Statutory Auditors
London, United Kingdom
17 May 2010

Our Business
TABLE A
Summary income statement based on proportional consolidation for the year ended 31 March 2010
The following pro forma information is unaudited and does not form part of the consolidated primary statements or the notes thereto. It presents
the results of the Group, with its share of the results of joint ventures and funds included on a line by line, i.e. proportional basis. The underlying
profit before taxation and total profit after taxation are the same as presented in the consolidated income statement.
3 months ended Year ended Year ended
Strategy in Action
31 Mar 31 Dec 30 Sep 30 Jun 31 Mar 31 Mar
2010 2009 2009 2009 2010 2009
Q4 Q3 Q2 Q1
£m £m £m £m £m £m
Rent receivable 129 128 140 141 538 616

Spreading of tenant incentives and guaranteed rent increases 3 6 7 7 23 33
Surrender premiums 1
Gross rental income 132 134 147 148 561 650
Property operating expenses (6) (6) 1 (5) (16) (52)
Net rental income 126 128 148 143 545 598
Fees and other income 8 1 2 4 15 20
Performance Review
Administrative expenses (16) (17) (14) (18) (65) (58)
Net interest costs (56) (54) (70) (66) (246) (292)
Underlying profit before taxation 62 58 66 63 249 268
Net valuation movement (includes profits and losses on disposal) 573 567 100 (332) 908 (4,074)
Realisation of cash flow hedges/non-recurring items (9) (9) (119)
Amortisation of intangible asset (4) (4) (3) (4) (15) (14)
Profit (loss) on ordinary activities before taxation 631 612 163 (273) 1,133 (3,939)
Tax charge relating to underlying profit (1) (1) (1) (2) (5) (9)
Deferred tax (expense) benefit (3) (8) (3) 2 (12) 58
Governance
Other taxation 2 20 2 24 9
Profit (loss) for the period after taxation 629 623 161 (273) 1,140 (3,881)
Underlying earnings per share – diluted basis 7.0p 6.6p 7.6p 7.2p 28.4p 41.0p
The underlying earnings per share is calculated on underlying profit before taxation of £249m, tax attributable to underlying profits of £5m and
860m shares on a diluted basis, for the year ended 31 March 2010 and underlying profit before taxation of £62m, tax attributable to underlying
profits of £1m and 867m shares on a diluted basis, for the three months ended 31 March 2010.
Summary balance sheet based on proportional consolidation as at 31 March 2010

The following pro forma information is unaudited and does not form part of the consolidated primary statements or the notes thereto. It presents
the composition of the EPRA net assets of the Group, with its share of the joint venture and funds assets and liabilities included on a line by line,
i.e. proportional basis and assuming full dilution.
Mark to
Share market of EPRA EPRA
of joint Share Share Deferred interest Head Net assets Net assets
Group ventures of funds options tax rate swaps lease† 2010 2009
£m £m £m £m £m £m £m £m £m
Retail properties 2,478 2,280 853 (9) 5,602 4,867

Office properties 1,493 1,249 (6) 2,736 3,570
Other properties 188 13 201 188
Total properties 4,159 3,542 853 (15) 8,539 8,625
Investment in joint ventures
Other Information
and funds 1,594 (1,146) (448)

Other investments 261 (105) 156 38
Intangible assets 10 10 25
Other net (liabilities) assets (266) (44) 8 30 43 (3) 15 (217) (360)
Net debt (1,550) (2,247) (413) 129 (4,081) (4,941)
Net assets 4,208 30 43 126 4,407 3,387
EPRA NAV per share (note 2) 504p 398p
†
Head lease liabilities include £7m (2009: £14m) relating to Group properties and £8m (2009: £9m) relating to joint venture properties.

TABLE A CONTINUED
Calculation of EPRA NNNAV per share

2010 2009
£m £m
EPRA NAV 4,407 3,387

Deferred tax arising on revaluation movements (43) (25)
Mark to market on effective cash flow hedges and related debt adjustments (129) (153)
Mark to market on debt 285 1,116
EPRA NNNAV 4,520 4,325
EPRA NNNAV per share 517p 508p

EPRA NNNAV is the EPRA NAV adjusted to reflect the fair value of debt and derivatives and to include deferred taxation on revaluations.
Total property valuations including share of joint ventures and funds

2010 2009
£m £m
British Land Group 4,152 5,810

Share of joint ventures and funds
Investment properties 4,395 2,775
Development properties 49
Head lease liabilities (8) (9)
4,387 2,815
Total property portfolio valuation 8,539 8,625
Segment information
Operating segments
The Group allocates resources to investment and asset management according to the sectors it expects to perform over the medium term. Its two
principal sectors are currently offices and retail. The relevant revenue, net rental income, assets and capital expenditure, being the measures of
profit or loss and total assets used by the management of the business, are set out below:
Offices Retail Other Total
2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009

£m £m £m £m £m £m £m £m
Revenue
British Land Group 194 278 187 268 26 26 407 572
Share of joint ventures and funds 44 193 158 3 4 240 162
Total 238 278 380 426 29 30 647 734
Net rental income

Share of joint ventures and funds 34 174 144 1 208 145
Total 177 230 349 350 19 18 545 598
Segment assets
British Land Group 1,493 3,570 2,488 2,103 823 953 4,804 6,626
Share of joint ventures and funds 1,340 5 3,369 2,996 33 38 4,742 3,039
Total 2,833 3,575 5,857 5,099 856 991 9,546 9,665
Capital expenditure
Share of joint ventures and funds 2 139 92 141 92
Total 167 383 195 262 10 12 372 657

Our Business
COMPANY BALANCE SHEET
Prepared in accordance with UK GAAP as at 31 March 2010
Company Balance Sheet UK GAAP

2010 2009
Strategy in Action
Note £m £m
Non-current assets
Investments and loans to subsidiaries d 23,697 24,702
Investments in joint ventures d 593 216
Intangible assets d 13 25
Other investments d 258 7
24,561 24,950
Current assets
Debtors g 368 397
Liquid investments e 195
Cash and short-term deposits e 32 257
Performance Review
595 654
Current liabilities
Short-term borrowings and overdrafts e (138) (3)
Creditors h (156) (145)
Amounts due to subsidiaries (19,374) (19,353)
(19,668) (19,501)
Net current liabilities (19,073) (18,847)
Total assets less current liabilities 5,488 6,103
Non-current liabilities
Debentures and loans e (1,531) (1,658)
Governance
(1,531) (1,658)
Net assets 3,957 4,445
Equity
Called up share capital i 220 217
Share premium j 1,244 1,247
Other reserves j (25) (33)
Revaluation reserve j 139
Retained earnings j 2,518 2,875
Shareholders’ funds 3,957 4,445
Chris Gibson-Smith Graham Roberts
Chairman Finance Director
Approved by the Board on 17 May 2010.
Company Number 621920
Other Information

COMPANY BALANCE SHEET CONTINUED
(a) Accounting policies

Accounting basis
The financial statements are prepared in accordance with applicable United Kingdom law and Accounting Standards (UK GAAP) and under the
historical cost convention as modified by the revaluation of investment properties and fixed asset investments and liquid investments (not in
accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) which are applied by the Group).
The major accounting policies of the Company are set out below and have been applied consistently throughout the current and the previous year.
The policies that differ from those applied by the Group (as stated in note 1 of the consolidated financial statements) are for investments and
deferred taxation:
Going concern
The financial statements are prepared on a going concern basis as explained in the Corporate Governance section on page 72.
Liquid investments
Liquid investments are shown at fair value and held as held for trading financial assets. Gains and losses from the changes in fair value are
recorded in the income statement.
Investments
Investments in joint ventures are stated at cost less provision for impairment. Investments in subsidiaries are stated at cost or directors’ valuation
less provision for impairment.
Intangible assets
Intangible assets, such as fund management contracts, acquired through business combinations, are measured initially at fair value and are
amortised on a straight-line basis over their estimated useful lives, and are subject to regular reviews for impairment.
Deferred taxation
Deferred tax is not recognised when fixed assets are revalued unless by the balance sheet date there is a binding agreement to sell the revalued
assets and the gain or loss expected to arise on the sale has been recognised in the financial statements. A deferred tax asset is regarded as
recoverable and therefore recognised only when, on the basis of all available evidence, it can be regarded as more likely than not that there will
be suitable taxable profits from which the future reversal of the underlying timing differences can be deducted.
(b) Dividends
Details of dividends paid and proposed are included in note 20 of the consolidated financial statements.
(c) Company loss for the financial year after tax

The Company has not presented its own profit and loss account as permitted by Section 408 of the Companies Act 2006. The loss after tax for
the year was £343m (2009: loss £2,411m).
The average monthly number of employees of the Company during the year was 164 (2009: 162). Employee costs include wages and salaries
of £24m (2009: £21m), social security costs of £3m (2009: £2m) and pension costs of £3m (2009: £3m). Details of the executive directors’
remuneration are disclosed in the remuneration report.
Audit fees in relation to the Parent Company only were £0.3m (2009: £0.5m).

Our Business
(d) Investments and loans to subsidiaries
Investments
Shares in Loans to in joint Intangible Other
subsidiaries subsidiaries ventures assets investments Total
£m £m £m £m £m £m
At 1 April 2009 18,018 6,684 216 25 7 24,950

Additions 56 118 380 252 806
Strategy in Action
Disposals (1) (1,361) (3) (3) (1,368)
Write back of (provision for) impairment 183 (9) (1) 173
At 31 March 2010 18,256 5,441 593 13 258 24,561
Shares in subsidiaries are included at cost or directors’ valuation in 1977, 1995, 1997 and 1999 to 2010 inclusive; their historical cost is £22,004m
(2009: £21,949m). The amount of £593m (2009: £216m) includes £64m (2009: £35m) of loans to joint ventures by the Company. The Company has
a 50% interest in The Public House Company Limited, which is registered and operates in England and Wales. Results of the joint ventures are set
out in note 12 of the consolidated financial statements. The historical cost of other investments is £264m (2009: £12m).
The principal subsidiaries, wholly-owned and, except where stated, registered and operating in England and Wales, are:
Performance Review
Executive Property The Mary Street Estate Limited
The British Land Corporation Limited† 1 & 4 & 7 Triton Limited The Retail & Warehouse Company Limited
BF Propco (No 10) Limited York House W1 Limited
Finance, Investment and Management BL Fixed Uplift Fund Limited Partnership
British Land Property Management Limited British Land Leisure Limited
BLD Property Holdings Limited British Land Retail Warehouses Limited
BL European Fund Management LLP Euston Tower Limited
British Land (Joint Ventures) Limited Osnaburgh Street Limited
British Land Property Advisers Limited Ropemaker Place Unit Trust (Jersey)
British Land Investments Netherlands Stockton Retail Park Limited †
Direct subsidiary of the Company.
Holding NV
Governance
(e) Net debt
2010 2009
£m £m
Secured on the assets of the Company

5.0055% First Mortgage Amortising Debentures 2035 103 104
Floating Rate Secured Loan Notes 2035 256 256
1,314 1,316
Unsecured
5.50% Senior Notes 2027 98 98
6.30% Senior US Dollar Notes 2015† 101 108
355 345
Interest rate derivatives: liabilities 49 53
Interest rate derivatives: assets (11) (15)
1,707 1,699
Liquid investments
Other Information

(195)
Net debt 1,480 1,442
†
Principal and interest on these borrowings were fully hedged into Sterling at the time of issue.

COMPANY BALANCE SHEET CONTINUED
Maturity analysis of net debt

2010 2009
£m £m
Repayable: within one year and on demand 138 3

two and five years 127 263
five and ten years 316 261
ten and fifteen years 9 211
fifteen and twenty years 441 441
twenty and twenty-five years 6 6
twenty-five and thirty years 373 375
1,531 1,658
Interest rate derivatives 38 38
Liquid investments (195)
Net debt 1,480 1,442
(f) Pension
The Company’s pension scheme is the principal pension scheme of the Group and details are set out in note 10 of the consolidated financial statements.
(g) Debtors
2010 2009
£m £m
Trade and other debtors† 49 58

Amounts owed by subsidiaries 293 315
Prepayments and accrued income 5
Interest rate derivative assets§ 11 15
368 397
†
Included within this balance is deferred consideration of £33m (2009: £34m) arising on the sale of investment properties for which the timing of the receipt is contingent and therefore
may fall due after one year.
§
(h) Creditors
2010 2009
£m £m
Trade creditors 23 16
Amounts due to joint ventures 37 29
Other taxation and social security 5 3
Accruals and deferred income 31 37
Interest rate derivative liabilities* 49 53
156 145
*Includes contracted cash flow with a maturity greater than one year at fair value.

Our Business
(i) Share capital
Ordinary shares of
£m 25p each
Issued, called and fully paid

At 1 April 2009 217 863,450,216
Issues 3 15,976,886
Strategy in Action
At 31 March 2010 220 879,427,102
(j) Share capital and reserves

Profit
Share Share Merger Other Revaluation and loss
capital premium reserve reserves reserve account Total
£m £m £m £m £m £m £m
At 1 April 2009 217 1,247 (33) 139 2,875 4,445

Share issues 3 (3)
Transfer to retained earnings (139) 139
Dividends paid (215) (215)
Adjustment for scrip dividend element 63 63
Performance Review
Adjustment for share and share option awards 1 1
Pension scheme movements (2) (2)
Retained loss for year (343) (343)
Derivatives valuation movement 6 6
Exchange movements on net investments 2 2
At 31 March 2010 220 1,244 (25) 2,518 3,957
The value of distributable reserves within the profit and loss account is £1,301m (2009: £752m).
(k) Contingent liabilities, capital commitments and related party transactions
Governance
At 31 March 2010, the Company had no contingent liabilities for guarantees to third parties (2009: £nil). The Company also had no capital
commitments (2009: £nil).
The Company has used the exemption under FRS 8 where disclosure is not required of transactions with fellow subsidiary undertakings 100%
of whose voting rights are controlled within the Group.
Related party transactions are the same for the Company as for the Group. For details refer to note 25 of the consolidated financial statements.
The Company has utilised the exemptions provided by FRS 1 (Revised) and has not presented a cash flow statement. A consolidated cash flow
statement has been presented in the Group financial statements.
Other Information

REPORT OF THE AUDITORS
Independent Auditors’ Report to the Members of The British Land Opinion on other matters prescribed by the Companies Act 2006
Company PLC In our opinion:
We have audited the parent company financial statements of The British > the part of the Directors’ Remuneration Report to be audited has been
Land Company PLC for the year ended 31 March 2010 which comprise properly prepared in accordance with the Companies Act 2006; and
the parent company balance sheet, and the related notes a to k. The > the information given in the Directors’ Report for the financial year
financial reporting framework that has been applied in their preparation for which the financial statements are prepared is consistent with
is applicable law and United Kingdom Accounting Standards (United the parent company financial statements.
Kingdom Generally Accepted Accounting Practice).
Matters on which we are required to report by exception
This report is made solely to the company’s members, as a body, in
We have nothing to report in respect of the following matters where
accordance with Chapter 3 of Part 16 of the Companies Act 2006. Our
the Companies Act 2006 requires us to report to you if, in our opinion:
audit work has been undertaken so that we might state to the Company’s
> adequate accounting records have not been kept by the parent
members those matters we are required to state to them in an auditors’
company, or returns adequate for our audit have not been received
report and for no other purpose. To the fullest extent permitted by law,
from branches not visited by us; or
we do not accept or assume responsibility to anyone other than the
> the parent company financial statements and the part of the
Company and the Company’s members as a body, for our audit work,
Directors’ Remuneration Report to be audited are not in agreement
for this report, or for the opinions we have formed.
with the accounting records and returns; or
> certain disclosures of directors’ remuneration specified by law
Respective responsibilities of directors and auditors
are not made; or
As explained more fully in the Directors’ Responsibilities Statement,
> we have not received all the information and explanations we
the directors are responsible for the preparation of the parent company
require for our audit.
financial statements and for being satisfied that they give a true and
fair view. Our responsibility is to audit the parent company financial
Other matter
statements in accordance with applicable law and International
We have reported separately on the Group financial statements
Standards on Auditing (UK and Ireland). Those standards require
of The British Land Company plc for the year ended 31 March 2010.
us to comply with the Auditing Practices Board’s (APB’s) Ethical
Standards for Auditors.
Scope of the audit of the financial statements

An audit involves obtaining evidence about the amounts and disclosures
Simon Letts BA FCA (Senior Statutory Auditor)
in the financial statements sufficient to give reasonable assurance
for and on behalf of Deloitte LLP
that the financial statements are free from material misstatement,
Chartered Accountants and Statutory Auditors
whether caused by fraud or error. This includes an assessment of:
London, United Kingdom
whether the accounting policies are appropriate to the parent
17 May 2010
company’s circumstances and have been consistently applied and
adequately disclosed; the reasonableness of significant accounting
estimates made by the directors; and the overall presentation of the
financial statements.
Opinion on financial statements

In our opinion the parent company financial statements:
> give a true and fair view of the state of the parent company’s
affairs as at 31 March 2010;
> have been properly prepared in accordance with United Kingdom
Generally Accepted Accounting Practice; and
> have been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the
Companies Act 2006.

Our Business
TEN YEAR RECORD
The table below summarises the last 10 years’ proportionally consolidated results, cash flows and balance sheets. Figures for 2010, 2009, 2008,
2007, 2006 and 2005 are prepared under IFRS. Figures for 2004 and earlier years are the UK GAAP comparatives adjusted to show gross rental
Strategy in Action
income on a proportional basis. FRS 21 became effective in 2006 under UK GAAP and has been applied retrospectively to 2004 and earlier years.
This standard requires proposed dividends not approved by the balance sheet date to be excluded from the balance sheet.
IFRS UK GAAP
2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001
£m £m £m £m £m £m5 £m £m £m £m
Income
Gross rental income1 561 650 709 706 751 630 566 552 514 476
Net rental income 545 598 667 661 701 585 523 514 477 452
Fees and other income 15 20 40 50 50 9 6 3 10 13
Interest expense (net) (246) (292) (350) (370) (436) (360) (336) (326) (318) (312)
Performance Review
Administrative expense (65) (58) (73) (84) (87) (53) (44) (44) (41) (32)
Underlying profit 249 268 284 257 228 181 149 147 128 121
Exceptional costs (not included in underlying profit) 4
(119) (305) (122) (180) (84)
Dividends declared 225 198 179 107 88 84 71 66 64 60
Summarised balance sheets

Total properties at valuation1,3 8,539 8,625 13,471 16,903 14,414 12,507 10,639 9,646 9,300 8,860
Net debt (4,081) (4,941) (6,413) (7,741) (6,684) (6,538) (5,397) (4,993) (4,632) (4,453)
Other assets and liabilities1 (51) (297) (122) (300) 72 (56) (157) (142) 167 251
EPRA NAV/Fully diluted adjusted net assets 4,407 3,387 6,936 8,862 7,802 5,913 5,085 4,511 4,835 4,658
Governance
Cash flow movement – Group only7
Cash generated from operations 248 406 477 494 455 464 381 374 382 380
Cash outflow from operations (112) (201) (295) (275) (359) (339) (218) (279) (283) (351)
Net cash inflow from operating activities 136 205 182 219 96 125 163 95 99 29
Cash (outflow) inflow from capital expenditure,
investments, acquisitions and disposals (39) 418 857 (54) 994 (526) (186) (271) (153) 82
Equity dividends paid (154) (188) (161) (91) (84) (77) (67) (65) (61) (57)
Cash (outflow) inflow from management
of liquid resources and financing (485) (58) (830) (11) (1,025) 459 137 267 108 (79)
(Decrease) increase in cash6 (542) 377 48 63 (19) (19) 47 26 (7) (25)
Capital returns
Growth in net assets2 30.1% (51.1%) (21.6%) 13.6% 31.9% 15.5% 12.7% (6.7%) 3.8% 13.7%
Total return4 33.5% (61.6%) (18.1%) 14.3% 33.2% 16.4% 13.0% 7.4% 4.2% 14.1%
Total return – pre-exceptional 33.5% (60.3%) (18.1%) 21.3% 34.6% 18.8% 13.0% 7.4% 4.2% 15.6%
Per share information9

Net asset value per share 504p 398p 1114p 1394p 1231p 935p 808p 718p 672p 647p
Memorandum Dividends declared in the year 26.0p 29.8p 29.0p 16.9p 14.1p 13.0p 12.0p 11.1p 10.3p 9.5p
Dividends paid in the year 27.3p 30.0p 26.8p 14.4p 13.3p 12.3p 11.4p 10.5p 9.7p 9.2p
Diluted earnings Underlying earnings per share 28.4p 41.0p 44.3p 35.9p 29.4p 22.2p 28.6p 22.4p 25.1p 21.8p
Other Information
IFRS earnings (loss) per share4,8 133p (614)p (251)p 389p 188p 104p n/a n/a n/a n/a
1
Including share of joint ventures and funds.
2
Represents movement in diluted EPRA NAV for 2007, 2006 and adjusted diluted net assets pre 2006.
3
Including surplus over book value of trading and development properties.
4
Including exceptional finance costs in 2001 £84m, 2005 £180m, 2006 £122m, 2007 £305m and 2009 £119m.
5
Restated for IFRS. The UK GAAP accounts shows gross rental income of £620m and underlying profit of £175m.
6
Represents movement in cash and cash equivalents under IFRS and movements in cash under UK GAAP.
7
Cash flow statement now presented under the direct method, with 2007 re-presented as a comparative. The change to presentation in the primary statement does not affect the
comparability of values in the Ten Year Record.
8
Under UK GAAP the revaluation of investment properties is not included in earnings per share.
9
Adjusted for the rights issue of 341m shares in March 2009.

FINANCIAL CALENDAR
Dividends on ordinary shares

The British Land Company PLC
First quarter Dividend declared August
Second quarter Dividend declared November
Third quarter Dividend declared February
Fourth quarter Dividend declared May
The fourth quarter dividend for 2009/10 of 6.5 pence per share (non-PID i.e. a normal dividend) is being paid on 13 August 2010. Shareholders will
be invited to reinvest this fourth quarter dividend in the Company via an enhanced scrip alternative with a 5% bonus (above the equivalent cash
value). Further details of the scrip alternative can be found on the Company’s website www.britishland.com/investors/dividends/scrip.
Interest payments
The British Land Company PLC
6.75% First Mortgage Debenture Bonds 2011 31 March, 30 September
5.0055% First Mortgage Amortising Debenture Bonds 2035 24 March, 24 September
BLD Property Holdings Limited

10.3125% First Mortgage Debenture Stock 2011 1 April, 1 October
6.125% First Mortgage Debenture Stock 2014 31 March, 30 September
9.125% First Mortgage Debenture Stock 2020 30 June, 31 December
128 The British Land Company PLC Other Information

Our Business
SHAREHOLDER INFORMATION
Analysis of shareholders – 31 March 2010

Number of Number of
Strategy in Action
Number of shares shareholders % shares %
1 – 1,000 7,091 58.49 2,986,271 0.34

1,001 – 5,000 3,509 28.94 7,608,358 0.88
5,001 – 20,000 740 6.10 7,176,383 0.83
20,001 – 50,000 223 1.84 7,063,570 0.81
50,001 – Highest 561 4.63 843,326,374 97.14
12,124 100.00 868,160,956 100.00
Individuals 7,563 62.38 12,356,007 1.42

Nominee Companies including Banks 4,231 34.90 825,242,360 95.06
Limited companies 218 1.80 17,892,257 2.06
Performance Review
Other corporate bodies including Pension Trusts 112 0.92 12,670,332 1.46
12,124 100.00 868,160,956 100.00
Registrars Share dealing service

British Land’s Share Registrars are Equiniti, Aspect House, Spencer Equiniti offer Shareview dealing, a service which allows you to buy
Road, Lancing, West Sussex BN99 6DW. or sell British Land’s shares if you are a UK resident.
Shareholder enquiry line: 0871 384 2143. You can deal in your shares on the internet or by phone. Log on to
www.shareview.co.uk/dealing or call 0845 603 7037 between 8.30am
The Registrar’s website is: www.shareview.co.uk
Governance
and 4.30pm, Monday to Friday, for more information about this service
Registering on this site will enable you, amongst other features, to view and for details of the rates. If you are an existing shareholder, you
your British Land shareholding online and to opt to receive shareholder will need your account/shareholder reference number which appears
mailings electronically. on your share certificate.
In addition to being our Share Registrar, Equiniti are also Registrars

ShareGift
for the BLD Property Holdings Limited Stock.
Shareholders with a small number of shares, the value of which makes
Bank of New York are Registrars of British Land’s Debentures. it uneconomic to sell them, may wish to consider donating them to
the charity ShareGift (registered charity 1052686), which specialises
They can be contacted at:
in using such holdings for charitable benefit. A ShareGift transfer form
Bank of New York Registrars, The Registry,
can be obtained from Equiniti, Aspect House, Spencer Road, Lancing,
34 Beckenham Road, Beckenham, Kent BR3 4TU.
West Sussex BN99 6DW.
Bondholder enquiry line: 0871 664 0300.
For further information, contact:
ShareGift, 17 Carlton House Terrace, London SW1Y 5AH
Telephone: 020 7930 3737
Website: www.sharegift.org
Annual General Meeting

The Annual General Meeting of The British Land Company PLC
will be held at The Ocean Room, The Cumberland Hotel,
Great Cumberland Place, London W1A 4RF on Friday 16 July 2010,
at 11.00am.
Other Information
Other Information The British Land Company PLC 129

GLOSSARY OF TERMS
Annualised rents are gross rents as at Equivalent yield is the net weighted
the reporting date plus, where rent reviews average income return a property will
are outstanding, any increases to applicable produce based upon the timing of the income
estimated rental value (as determined by received. In accordance with usual practice,
the Group’s external Valuers), less any ground the equivalent yields (as determined by
rents payable under head leases. the external Valuers) assume rent received
annually in arrears and on values before
Development construction cost is the total
deducting prospective purchaser’s costs.
cost of construction of a project to completion,
excluding site values and finance costs. Group is The British Land Company PLC
and its subsidiaries and excludes its share
EPRA is the European Public Real Estate
of joint ventures and funds.
Association.
IFRS International Financial Reporting
EPRA earnings is the profit after taxation
Standards.
excluding investment property revaluations
and gains/losses on disposals, intangible Initial yield is the annualised net rents
asset movements and their related taxation. generated by the portfolio expressed
as a percentage of the portfolio valuation,
EPRA net assets (EPRA NAV) are the balance
excluding development properties.
sheet net assets excluding the mark to
market on effective cash flow hedges and Interest cover is the number of times net
related debt adjustments, deferred taxation interest payable is covered by underlying
on revaluations and diluting for the effect profit before net interest payable and taxation.
of those shares potentially issuable under
IPD is Investment Property Databank Ltd
employee share schemes.
which produces an independent benchmark
EPRA NAV per share is EPRA NAV divided of property returns.
by the diluted number of shares at the
Like-for-like ERV growth is the change in
period end.
ERV over a period on the standing investment
EPRA NNNAV is the EPRA NAV adjusted to properties expressed as a percentage
reflect the fair value of debt and derivatives and of the ERV at the start of the period.
to include deferred taxation on revaluations.
Like-for-like rental income growth is the
Estimated rental value (ERV) is the external growth in gross rental income on properties
Valuers’ opinion as to the open market owned throughout the current and previous
rent which, on the date of valuation, could periods under review. This growth rate
reasonably be expected to be obtained on includes revenue recognition and lease
a new letting or rent review of a property. accounting adjustments but excludes
properties held for development in either
period, properties with guaranteed rent
reviews, asset management determinations
and surrender premiums.

Our Business
Loan to Value (LTV) is the ratio of gross debt Passing rent is the gross rent, less any ground
less cash, short-term deposits and liquid rent payable under head leases.
Strategy in Action
investments to the aggregate value of
Planning consent gives consent for a
properties and investments.
development, and covers matters such as use
Mark to market is the difference between the and design. Full details of the development
book value of an asset or liability and its scheme must be provided in an application
market value. for full planning consent, including detailed
design, external appearance and landscaping
Market value in relation to property assets
before a project can proceed. Outline planning
is the estimated amount for which a property
consent establishes the broad outline of the
should exchange on the date of valuation
scheme and is subject to the later approval
between a willing buyer and a willing seller
of the details of the design.
in an arm’s-length transaction after proper
Performance Review
marketing wherein the parties had each Property Income Distribution (PID) As a REIT
acted knowledgeably, prudently and without the Group is obliged to distribute 90% of the
compulsion (as determined by the Group’s tax exempt profits. These dividends, which are
external Valuers). In accordance with usual referred to as PIDs, are subject to withholding
practice, the Group’s external Valuers tax at the basic rate of income tax. Certain
report valuations net, after the deduction of classes of shareholders may qualify to receive
the prospective purchaser’s costs, including the dividend gross. See our website (www.
stamp duty land tax, agent and legal fees. britishland.com) for details. The Group can
also make other normal (non-PID) dividend
Net rental income is the rental income
payments which are taxed in the usual way.
receivable in the period after payment of
Governance
ground rents and net property outgoings. Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT) A listed
Net rental income will differ from annualised property company which qualifies for and
net rents and passing rent due to the effects has elected into a tax regime, which exempts
of income from rent reviews, net property qualifying UK property rental income and
outgoings and accounting adjustments for gains on investment property disposals from
fixed and minimum contracted rent reviews corporation tax.
and lease incentives.
Reversion is the increase in rent estimated
Occupancy rate is the estimated rental value by the external Valuers, where the passing
of let units expressed as a percentage of the rent is below the estimated rental value.
total estimated rental value of the portfolio, The increases to rent arise on rent reviews,
excluding development properties. letting of vacant space and expiry of rent-
free periods.
Open A1 is a planning consent enabling the
sale of a wide range of goods, including food,
fashion, footwear, books, electronics and
household goods – as set out in The Town and
Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987.
Other Information
Other Information The British Land Company PLC 131

GLOSSARY OF TERMS CONTINUED
Reversionary yield is the anticipated yield, Vacancy rate is the estimated rental value of
which the initial yield will rise to once the vacant properties expressed as a percentage
rent reaches the estimated rental value. of the total estimated rental value of the
portfolio, excluding development properties.
Tenant (or lease) incentives are any incentives
offered to occupiers to enter into a lease. Virtual freehold represents a long
Typically the incentive will be an initial leasehold tenure for a period up to 999
rent-free period, or a cash contribution years. A ‘peppercorn’, or nominal, rental
to fit-out or similar costs. Under accounting is paid annually.
rules the value of lease incentives given
Weighted average debt maturity Each
to tenants is amortised through the income
tranche of Group debt is multiplied by
statement on a straight-line basis to the
the remaining period to its maturity and
earliest lease termination date.
the result is divided by total Group debt
Total return is the growth in EPRA NAV in issue at the period end.
per share plus dividends paid expressed
Weighted average interest rate is the Group
as a percentage of EPRA NAV per share
loan interest and derivative costs per annum
at the beginning of the period.
at the period end, divided by total Group debt
Total shareholder return is the growth in issue at the period end.
in value of a shareholding over a specified
Weighted average lease term is the average
period, assuming that dividends are reinvested
lease term remaining to first break, or expiry,
to purchase additional units of stock.
across the portfolio weighted by rental
Underlying earnings per share (EPS) consists income. This is also disclosed assuming all
of underlying profit after tax divided by the break clauses are exercised at the earliest
diluted weighted average number of shares date, as stated. Excludes short-term licences
in issue during the period. and residential leases.
Underlying profit before tax is the profit Yield shift is a movement (usually expressed
for the period before taxation after excluding in basis points) in the equivalent yield of a
amortisation of intangible assets and property asset.
impairment charges, net valuation gains/
losses (including profits/losses on disposals),
other receivables of a capital nature, net
refinancing charges, fair value movements on
liquid investments and swap close out costs.

Head Office and Registered Office
York House
45 Seymour Street
London W1H 7LX
Telephone +44 (0)20 7486 4466
Fax +44 (0)20 7935 5552
www.britishland.com
info@britishland.com
Designed by Likemind
Main photography by Barry Willis
Printed by Pureprint
Head Office and Registered Office
York House
45 Seymour Street
London W1H 7LX
Telephone +44 (0)20 7486 4466
Fax +44 (0)20 7935 5552
www.britishland.com
info@britishland.com

2010 Annual Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2010 Annual Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

WHAT

OUR BUSINESS PERFORMANCE REVIEW FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

> Underlying PBT down 7% to £249 million: disposals less

+13.5% acquisitions reduced profits by £33 million

Net asset value1 per share 504p 398p +27

TOTAL PORTFOLIO RETAIL OFFICE

REFOCUSING THE PORTFOLIO

> £1.1 billion sale of 50% of Broadgate into a JV with Blackstone

DIRECTORS’ REPORT: Our Business The British Land Company PLC 01

Focus on prime property

> Focus on high-quality prime retail and London office assets

+13.5% 97% 12.6 years

> High occupancy: portfolio 97% let

> 98% of current rent still contracted in three years’ time

DIRECTORS’ REPORT: Our Business The British Land Company PLC 03

Substantial financial resources

47% 11.1 years

FLEXIBILITY AND CAPITAL EFFICIENCY

Funds Joint venture partners

HUT PREF TESCO SAINSBURY’S

HIF BLACKSTONE LSP GREEN

> Desirable properties

> 1.2 million sq ft of committed office developments

DIRECTORS’ REPORT: Our Business The British Land Company PLC 05

OUR £8.5 BILLION PORTFOLIO COMPRISES HIGH-QUALITY

DIRECTORS’ REPORT: Our Business The British Land Company PLC 07

WE FOCUS ON PRIME CENTRAL LONDON OFFICES

focused on fashion, health & and capital returns.

DIRECTORS’ REPORT: Our Business The British Land Company PLC 09

WE HAVE SIGNIFICANT EXPERIENCE AND

DIRECTORS’ REPORT: Our Business The British Land Company PLC 11

DIRECTORS’ REPORT: Our Business The British Land Company PLC 13

the 2.4% first half decline.

DIRECTORS’ REPORT: Our Business The British Land Company PLC 15

Occupancy rate 99% 93% 97%

DIRECTORS’ REPORT: Strategy in Action The British Land Company PLC 17

deflation in 2010/11. However, we feel well

DIRECTORS’ REPORT: Strategy in Action The British Land Company PLC 19

We expect to become more active in of organic growth in our existing portfolio

In Europe, we continue to monitor real estate

High quality income stream to support High quality income stream

DIRECTORS’ REPORT: Strategy in Action The British Land Company PLC 21

Approach to risk management Risk process

The risk processes described above are

Property investment Net Asset Value. Defined investment strategy.

DIRECTORS’ REPORT: Strategy in Action The British Land Company PLC 23

PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL RISKS

Taxation compliance Taxation penalties. Detailed understanding of REIT legislation.

Ethics Reputational damage. Segregation of duties and dual payment authorities.

Vetting of new staff background and employment history.

DIRECTORS’ REPORT: Strategy in Action The British Land Company PLC 25

“ The Group’s underlying

Gross rental income 342 219 561 497 153 650

DIRECTORS’ REPORT: Performance Review The British Land Company PLC 27

Gross rental income1

Retail Total – like-for-like2

Driven by retail warehouses Disposals 63 183

Office -0.4% Total

1 With proportional consolidation.

DIRECTORS’ REPORT: Performance Review The British Land Company PLC 29

504 pence EPRA net assets

EPRA NAV per share

NAV per share For an explanation of EPRA adjustments, see Note 2.

“ The Group’s underlying

1 With proportional consolidation.

b) Net Unsecured Borrowings not to exceed Non-recourse to British Land