1

2009 Full-Year Results22 February 2010

Good Morning.

I’m John Nelson, Chairman of Hammerson. I just wanted to introduce David and the team to you.

He became Chief Executive in October and we are delighted with the progress the Company’s made in the short time since. So without further ado – over to him to run through the presentation.

2

2

Agenda

� Introduction – David Atkins

� Financial Results – Simon Melliss

� Investment Markets and Operational Review – David Atkins

� Transactions and Development Update – Peter Cole

� Summary and Conclusion – David Atkins

3

3

Thank you John. I’ve said it before but it is a real privilege to be Chief Executive of Hammerson and have the opportunity to present to you today.

This is a great business with great people.

We are all pleased that the investment markets are recovering but we are barely through the worst recession for a generation.

We need to keep changing and improving. I want Hammerson to be a real leader in the industry. And I am going to share with you today some of the reasons why I think we will be.

So turning to the year in review…

4

4

Completion of 60 Threadneedle Street

Rights Issue raised £584 m

Opening of Union Square, Aberdeen

Planning approvals for:

• Brent Cross Cricklewood, London• Bishops Place, London• Watermark WestQuay, Southampton

Key Events 2009

Completion of retail park extensions

Positioning for Growth

Lower Gearing

Disposals reduced debt by £780 m

Portfolio Management

Acquisitions:

• Silverburn, Glasgow• Les Terrasses du Port, Marseille

2009 can be summarised as follows:

First, we reduced our gearing through the rights issue and asset disposals.

Second, portfolio management. We completed two major developments, completed extensions within the retail parks portfolio, and undertook a substantial amount of letting activity.

Finally, in line with my aim to position the company for growth we obtained a number of planning permissions for our future development schemes and undertook two significant acquisitions towards the end of the year.

Turning to the results…

5

5

Results

Year ended31 Dec 2009

31 Dec 2009 30 June 2009

Adjusted profit before tax £130.0m

19.7p

£4.21

Adjusted earnings per share

Adjusted NAV per share, EPRA basis(1)

Total dividend per share 15.45p

72%Gearing

£3.73

81%

Notes:

1) Restated for bonus share element of rights issue.

2) Pro forma following rights issue.

Year ended31 Dec 2008

31 Dec 2008

£113.7m

25.8p(1)

£5.16(2)

18.9p(1)

118%

Adjusted Earnings Per Share was 19.7 pence and the total dividend is 15.45 pence. Simon will give further explanation of the movements against last year.

NAV declined to £3.73 in the first half then, reflecting the swing in investment markets, increased by 13% to £4.21 in the second half.

If we look now at the portfolio…

6

6

12% offices

88% retail

34% France

66% UK

Prime Investment Portfolio

Passing rent: £318 million

Reversionary potential: 4.1%

Occupancy rate: 95%

Average unexpired lease term: 8.6 years

16 shopping centres; 16 retail parks; 6 offices

Total of 64 properties

Over 2,400 occupiers

Average lot size: £80 million

I’d like to highlight some of our key strengths. We have a prime, modern portfolio, with reversionary potential, much of which we have developed ourselves.

We are 88% retail focused. We are a retail specialist, and we have critical mass in that sector.

However, that should not diminish the importance of the office business. We have some excellent development opportunities especially in London.

And a third of our portfolio is French retail. We estimate that over the last five years our French business has added around £400 million to net assets.

Now, I would like to take a few minutes to share with you my thoughts on our strategy and how that will lead to outperformance.

7

7

Drivers of Property Returns

Investor sentiment

Short-term

Other investment markets

Debt availability and cost

Economic prosperity

Planning regulations

Long-term

Occupier trends

Capital movements Real rental growth

Rent volatility Obsolescence

First of all putting this in context.

Over the short term, property returns are often dominated by capital movements caused by fluctuations in yields. In many years, these movements will outweigh rental returns. Over the longer term, however, the returns tend to be derived from incomeand income growth.

I believe there are two elements to portfolio management:

First, long term growth in income. For retail property, we have a greater ability to affect rents than the more volatile office market, where we are effectively a price taker.

Second, actively evaluating each asset against financial benchmarks to determine the buy/sell decision.

These fundamentals have helped me to determine my strategy for the business.

8

8

Our Approach

Actions Outcome

Asset Management:

Focus on income growth

Creation of customer teams

Adding new skills

Portfolio Management:

Capital recycling

Development

Innovative transactions

Capital Structure:

Debt: Equity

Efficient, flexible funding

Joint ventures

Best owner-manager and developer of retail and office properties

Asset outperformance

Attractive shareholder returns

First, asset management to protect and grow income over the longer term.

We focus on the tenant mix and the vibrancy of the properties to ensure they remain attractive to occupiers. I want Hammerson to be at the forefront of innovation. We need to speed up the leasing process, we need to get our tenants in quickly and we need to understand customer trends. To achieve this we are restructuring our leasing teams making new appointments in sales and marketing to align our business with our tenants.

Second, in terms of portfolio management, we will rigorously evaluate each of our assets and developments against clear, financial benchmarks. Where we’ve worked an asset hard and we can’t see future growth, we will recycle capital into higher return opportunities.

Third, is our capital structure. Although gearing can enhance shareholder returns, as a REIT, the tax advantage of debt is removed. Accordingly the level of gearing may be lower on average than recently. We will ensure that we have flexible and efficient funding. We have very little secured debt, which enables us to quickly utilise facilities. Last, our expertise is attractive to joint venture partners as we have recently seen with Canada Pension Plan in Silverburn.

So in summary…I want to work the assets hard and I won’t be afraid to sell.

I want Hammerson to be the best owner manager and developer of retail and office properties. This approach will drive asset outperformance and produce attractive returns for our shareholders.

With that I’ll hand to Simon to talk through the numbers in more detail…

9

9

Financial Results

10

10

Net rental income 293.6 299.8

For the year ended 31 December 2009 2008

Properties owned throughout 234.0 231.4

Acquisitions 1.7 (0.1)

Developments 27.5 9.1

Properties sold 30.4 70.5

Exchange translation and other - (11.1)

Net Rental Income

£ million Like for Like Gross Rents

UK Shopping centres -0.4%UK Retail parks +3.9%UK Offices +3.0%French retail +5.7%Total +2.6%

This slide analyses the change in our net rental income highlighting the effect of developments and disposals.

On the first line you will see the like-for-like income, which increased by £2.6 million that’s 1.1%.

At the gross rental level, i.e. before costs, we saw slightly higher like for like growth.

The UK shopping centres experienced a small decline, whilst all other areas saw good growth. Overall gross rents increased by 2.6%.

11

11

Total

EPRA basis

Vacancy Rates

UK Retail 5.5% 6.4%

UK Offices

French Retail

8.4%

1.5%

20.4%

2.2%

5.7%

6.2%

2.3%

31 Dec 2009

4.8% 7.4% 4.8%

30 June 2009 31 Dec 2008

We have made good progress on letting vacant space in a tough environment in the UK. Since June the vacancy rate overall has fallen by 2.6 percentage points, ending the year at 4.8%, beating the 20% reduction which we targeted for the second half.

(Just to note that, excluding Aberdeen the UK Retail vacancy rate would be 4%.)

Turning to profit…

12

12

Profit for the year 125.3 110.3

Operating profit 253.5 257.5

Interest (123.5) (143.8)

Underlying profit before tax 130.0 113.7

Tax and minorities (4.7) (3.4)

Underlying Profit

£ million

Note:

1) Restated for bonus element of rights issue.

2) Number of shares in issue at 31 December 2009: 702.9 m

For the year ended 31 December 2009 2008

Adjusted earnings per share 19.7p 25.8p(1)

Dividend per share 15.45p 18.93p(1)

Average number of shares in issue 637.2 m 426.9 m(1)

Rights issue 11Lower interest rates 22Increased rents and lower overheads 6Exchange translation 8

47Party offset by:Developments (22)Disposals (9)Total 16

£ million

Our underlying profit before tax was £130 million, up £16 million on 2008. The reasons for this are shown in the box on the right:

In particular the rights issue reduced the level of debt saving £11 million of interest. Lower interest rates generally saved £22 million. However, vacancy at the recently completed developments contributed to a shortfall of income against interest cost, reducing profits by £22 million.

A word about earnings per share. Profit for the year was £125 million; up 14%, whilst the average number of shares increased by 49% to 637 million, leading to lower earnings per share. On a proforma basis, earnings in 2008 would have been 19.1 pence rather than the 25.8 pence you see here. For 2010, please note that we started the year with 703 million shares in issue.

The dividend for the year is 15.45 pence, this can be compared with our pro-forma dividend for 2008 of 15.0 pence. We have announced a second interim dividend of 8.5 pence per share, payable on 1 April, We are also offering a scrip alternative. Our scrip alternative in October saw a 49% take up, saving £24 million of cash.

Moving on to the balance sheet.

13

13

Shareholders’ equity 2,950 2,821

31 Dec 2009 31 Dec 2008

Property assets 5,142 6,457

Net debt (2,124) (3,333)

Other net liabilities (68) (195)

Sub-total 2,950 2,929

Deferred tax - (108)

Balance Sheet

£ million

Note:

1) Pro forma following the rights issue.

Adjusted net asset value per share £4.21 £5.16(1)

Gearing 72% 118%

At the end of 2009, gearing was 72%, reflecting a reduction in net debt of £1.2 billion in the year. Net assets per share were £4.21, and the movements are analysed on the next slide.

14

14

31 December 2009 2,960 4.21

31 December 2008 proforma 3,591 5.16

Disposals (163) (0.23)

Retained profit 164 0.23

Dividends (68) (0.10)

Exchange and other movements (120) (0.22)

NAV Analysis

Shareholders’ funds(1)

(£ million)Adjusted NAV(1)

(£ per share)

Notes:

1) Excluding deferred tax and fair value of derivatives, calculated in accordance with EPRA best practice.

31 December 2008 restated 3,007 7.03

Rights issue 584 (1.87)

Revaluation:

H1 (766) (1.09)

H2 322 0.46

On the third line you can see the proforma net asset value, following the rights issue of £5.16 per share at the end of 2008.

In the first half of the year we saw large falls in property values, reducing net assets by £766 million or over £1 per share. This was partially reversed in the second half with the portfolio increasing in value leading to a 46 pence per share increase in NAV.

Looking at the year end as a whole….

15

15

Capital Returns – UK and France

Shopping Centres Retail Parks Offices Total

Value£m

Capital return %

Value£m

Capital return %

Value£m

Capital return %

Value£m

Capital return %

UK 1,978 -8.3 833 0.6 596 -7.8 3,407 -5.9

France 1,643 -10.2 92 -19.7 - -36.7 1,735 -14.2

Total 3,621 -9.0 925 -2.0 596 -13.1 5,142 -8.9

The capital return was negative 8.9% in 2009, with France showing -14.2% and the UK -5.9%.

The loss for French offices reflects the sales we made in the year.

Looking at this in more detail.

16

16

UK portfolio

-400

-300

-200

-100

0

100

200

300

400H1 H2 Year

French portfolio

-400

-300

-200

-100

0

100

200

300

400H1 YearH2

Valuation Movements

£m £m

Change in valuation yields Income and rental value growth Other movements

The graphs show 2009 components of valuation change

This chart splits the valuation changes into the effects of yields (the blue bars) are rental values (the pink bars). The UK is on the left.

For the UK, the first half of 2009 saw yields increasing, reducing values by £320 million. Rental values were falling, reducing values by a further £200 million.

In the second half yields fell, increasing values and almost exactly offsetting the first half effect. Rent values declined a little. So for the year as a whole, the 6% decline in the UK can be attributed to lower rental values seen in the first six months of 2009.

In France there was a rather different picture. Yields increased in the first half, reducing values by £200 million, whereas the second half saw yields pretty stable. With rental values broadly unchanged in the year, the decline in value in France for 2009 of -14% was almost entirely due to increased valuation yields.

17

17

Taxation (1) (116)

2009 2008

Cash generated from operations 255 276

121 76

Dividends (65) (87)

Cash Flow

£ million

Net interest (134) (200)

Acquisitions (177) (140)

Capital expenditure (188) (391)

Disposals 780 245

415 (286)

Cash Flow 1038 (341)

Working capital movements (16) 70

Share Issues 584 2

Exchange translation 171 (496)

Decrease/(Increase) in net debt 1209 (837)

I mentioned a few minutes ago that net debt reduced by £1.2 billion, and that is shown on the foot of this slide.

You can see on the third line that our operating cash flow improved in 2009, rising from £76 million to £121 million.

This improvement is greater than our profit improvement due to the reduction in capitalised interest. Net disposal proceeds were £780 million and the rights issue raised £584 million.

18

18

Financing

� Net debt £2.1 billion

� Gearing 72%

� Average cost of debt 5.1%

� Cash and undrawn committed facilities of £767 million

� 97% of gross debt unsecured

� Only £63 million of borrowings mature before end 2011

� Weighted average maturity of debt of eight years

This slide summarises our financing position. Our average cost of borrowing in 2009 was 5.1%. We benefited from lower short-term rates which averaged 3.5% in the year.

97% of our debt is unsecured.

Total liquidity at 31 December 2009 was £767 million, whilst very little debt matures in either 2010 or 2011.

19

19

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028

Bank debt drawn Euro bonds Sterling bonds

Gross Debt Maturity Profile

£ million

This chart shows the spread of debt maturities. Since 31 December we have used cash to reduce the 2012 drawn debt by just over £100 million.

I am confident about our ability to refinance the bank debt maturing in 2012 and 2013, well in advance of the maturity dates.

20

20

Sound Financial Position

31 Dec 2009 31 Dec 2008

Gearing 72% 118%

Interest cover 2.2 times 1.7 times

Net debt/EBITDA 8.3 times 12.7 times

3%

97%

Secured Unsecured

62%

38%

Euro Sterling

28%

72%

Bank debt Bonds

Total gross debt £2.3 billion

Nearly three quarters of our debt is drawn from the bond market – shown by the polo mint on the left and we are much less reliant on the bank market than we were 12 months ago.

Our credit ratios are sound and we will be carefully monitoring all three ratios shown here. We will place an equal focus on interest cover and the level of debt relative to EBITDA as on balance sheet gearing. The latter, rather like loan to value ratios, is useful but can be affected by short-term valuation movements.

21

21

Summary

� Improving underlying cash flow

� No significant refinancing requirements before 2012

� Substantial unutilised committed facilities

� Values improved in the UK and stabilising in France

So, to summarise…

Our underlying cash flow from our investment properties is improving. We have limited short-term refinancing required and we ended 2009 with substantial facilities available.

Values have improved in the UK and are stabilising in France, David will now talk about the investment markets in a little more detail.

22

22

Investment Markets

Thank you Simon. Turning now to an overview of the investment markets.

23

23

UK: Yields and Finance Costs

Source: IPD Quarterly Index, PMA, CBRE

% %

-1.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

1993 1997 2001 2005 2009

Spread between all-property equivalent yieldsand five-year swaps

-1.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

1993 1997 2001 2005 2009

Spread between all-property equivalent yieldsand ten-year gilts

The shaded areas show the range of average spreads over successive ten year periods between 1993 and 2009.The red dot represents the spread between the current all-property equivalent yields and ten year average swap/gilt rate.

We showed this graph six months ago to demonstrate that the spread between property and other asset classes was at an all time high.

Although yields on property have come down, you can see that the spreads still remain very high against historic averages.

We should, however, remember that interest rates are generally low. So, the red dots represent the spread between the current equivalent yield and the ten year average interest rate. And for this reason, property still shows good value and is therefore attracting a lot of capital to the UK real estate market.

So turning to the outlook…

24

24

Prime UK Yields Reducing

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

1993 1998 2003 2008 2013

� Capital values at December 09 circa 35% below June 07 peak

� Increased transactions

� Return of institutional and other investors

� Large yield differential between prime and secondary

The shaded area shows the range of ten year average yields between 1993 and 2009

Source: IPD, PMA, CBRE

%

Market ForecastsActual

Long-term equivalent yields

Range

We see prime UK yields continuing to reduce. Capital values are still around 35% below the June 07 peak.

We have seen a return of institutional investors to the market, transaction volumes are increasing, and we expect prime yields to continue to move in.

Investors are still quite discerning, wary of poor quality property, and therefore the spread between prime and secondary is very high.

But before we all get carried away a word of caution…

25

25

Lending to UK Real Estate

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008

£ billion

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Stock of lending to the UK real estate sector (LHS) Commercial property value index (RHS)

Source: IPD, Bank of England, Morgan Stanley, Thomson DataStream

Index: June 2007 = 100

Despite improving values, there is a significant amount of outstanding bank debt to commercial property.

The blue mass here, and that’s probably the right description, shows lending of some £250 billion to commercial property. The banks have been clear that this will reduce over time, and I think it will take many years.

Equity will be needed to replace debt. Also, I believe this deleveraging will affect poor quality, secondary and tertiary property far more than prime.

Finally, asset prices have undoubtedly been increased by the Bank of England’s infusion of money into the system. These two factors, deleveraging and the reversal of quantitative easing, may constrain value growth particularly for secondary assets.

If we look at France…

26

26

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

1998 2003 2008

France: Yields and Finance Costs

Source: IPD, PMA, CBRE, Hammerson

The shaded areas show the range of average spreads over successive five year periods between 1998 and 2009The red dot represents the spread between the current all-property equivalent yields and ten year government debt rate.

%Spread between all-property initial yield and five-year swaps

%

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

1998 2003 2008

Spread between all-property initial yield and ten-year government debt

Again we showed these graphs six months ago.

As you can see, spreads over other asset classes are high.

As before, the red dots represent the spread between the current all-property equivalent yield and the ten year government debt rate.

27

27

5

5.5

6

6.5

7

7.5

8

1998 2003 2008 2013

French Yield Outlook

� Transactions low in 2009 but increasing in second half

� Shopping centre yields stabilised

� Smaller yield recovery than the UK

� Benefit of indexation

%

Market ForecastsActual

Source: IPD, PMA, CBRE, Hammerson

The shaded area shows the range of five year average yields between 1993 and 2009

Long-term net initial yield

Range

We believe that prime shopping centre yields in France have stabilised, and are arguably reducing. There is now strong demand for high quality assets.

We do, however, feel that there will be a smaller yield recovery from this point than we will see in the UK. France will, however, continue to benefit from indexation over the medium term and there is good demand for indexed assets that are not overrented.

So to summarise on the investment markets.

Capital is available for investment and values are rising.

However, uncertainties remain including the need for deleveraging.

Therefore, we need to make sure that our operational performance is top class.

28

28

Operational Review

First some background…

29

29

UK Consumer Environment

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

2005 2007 2009

Non-food retail sales growth (12 month rolling

annual average)

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Claimant count unemployment

Retail Sales (%)Unemployment (thousands) Consumer Confidence

Source: Thomson DataStreamSource: Thomson DataStream Source: Thomson DataStream

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

2005 2007 2009

Consumer confidence

In the UK, unemployment has risen dramatically.

Consumer confidence has been very weak over the course of the last 18 months, but is trending upwards.

The data shows that non-food retail sales have been weak, but are slowly picking up, albeit still negative. In reality, wehave seen a number of retailers going bust, leaving those that remain to pick up greater market share and HMV and Carpet Right are very good examples.

Now in France…

30

30

French Environment

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

2003 2005 2007 2009

Retail sales (12m rolling annual average)

2,000

2,200

2,400

2,600

2,800

3,000

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Unemployment volume

Retail Sales (%)Unemployment (thousands) Consumer Confidence

Source: Thomson DataStreamSource: Thomson DataStream Source: Thomson DataStream

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

2003 2005 2007 2009

Consumer confidence

Many of the lead indicators mirror those in the UK although the French recession has been less severe and importantly for us the French consumer is far less indebted than in the UK.

Nevertheless retail sales in France have not been as resilient as one might expect, partly because the French have been saving more, and partly the success of their car scrappage scheme which is generally paid for on credit and has eaten into their monthly disposable income.

But against this backdrop our centres have performed well.

31

31

Trading Performance

Car parking income of £7.9 million

Commercialisation of £2.4 million

Footfall up 1.3% (-2% Benchmark Footfall UK)

Sales up 0.4% (-1.8% ONS non-food retail sales)

Car parking income of €0.7 million

Commercialisation of €1.8 million

Footfall down 3.7% (-3.7% French Footfall Index)

Sales down 3.6% (-4.2% CNCC Index)

Footfall and SalesFootfall and Sales

Non-rental Income

TradingTrading

Non-rental Income

Stronger sectors: Homewares, mixed fashion, footwear, gifts

Weaker sectors: Department stores, ladieswear, menswear

Stronger sectors: Mixed fashion, accessories

Weaker sectors: Electrical and media, sport and outdoor

FranceUK

In the UK, footfall and sales have both outperformed the benchmark. Furthermore, if anchor stores are excluded, like for like sales increased by 1.6%. Our aim is to improve each centre’s trading by replacing weaker tenants with those with higher turnovers. On this measure, same store sales, excluding anchors increased just under 4%.

We have had significant income from car parking and commercialisation during the year – activities which not only produce income but add to the convenience and vibrancy of our centres.

In France, footfall was in line with the benchmark, although sales marginally outperformed. As in the UK, we have added to the performance with non-rental income.

Whilst we are talking about trading, in the UK, the number of units in administration has now fallen substantially to 45 units, half of which are still trading. And in France, just 19 units are in administration, with 13 still trading.

32

32

Tracking consumer trends

De-stress, vitality and leisureReturn to authenticity

Kid-ulthood/Retro

Polarisation: local and global

32

I’ve talked about asset management, tenant mix and vibrancy. I believe to be a leader in this area we have to go way beyond thetraditional property skills as asset manager. We have to anticipate consumer and retail trends so we have people in our company whose job it is to identify which formats and brands will be likely winners.

Now this is a very busy slide but what I want to get across is that whether it is a return to our childhood purchases or a brand like Hollister going global; a new local food market at the Oracle orjust simply a good film and a bite to eat. All of these factors are creating demand for our centres.

The outcome is high occupancy centres with growing sales –exactly what both we and our retailers want.

And a quick word on affordability…

33

33

Affordability trends

Rent: Sales %

Like for like 13.9 14.3

UK 2009 2008

Rent: Sales %

France 2009 2008

• Benefit of introducing strong retail formats• Affordability rate lower at five centres in 2009

• Rent levels below UK• Indexation in 2009

Like for like 10.1 8.8

Note:

Excluding anchor tenants.

It’s clearly a major issue for our customers. It is in our interests to ensure that rent to sales ratio remains appropriatein our centres.

You will see that in France rents are generally at a lower levelrelative to sales than in the UK. This is principally a result of the different lease structures. In the UK, the setting of rentalvalues and their impact on rent reviews leads us to favour a high turnover, a higher margin fashion retail mix.

Our objective is to increase turnover by active management, marketing and by refreshing the tenant mix and as a result we have actually seen a slight fall in rent to sales ratios in the UK in our stabilised assets. In our newer centres we need to work hard to improve the sales performance as they mature.

Looking at the outcome of all that activity…

.

34

34

UK Retail Rents

£ million

119.1m121.0m

(0.4)m2.2m

12.6m(16.3)m

100

105

110

115

120

125Terminationsand expiries

New lettingsand renewals

Rent reviews Rents passing31 Dec 2009

Rents passing31 Dec 2007

Other

Note:

Movements in passing rents on a like-for-like basis.

This slide shows UK like-for-like net renal income over the last 2 years. We lost £16 million in terminations and expiries over that period, partly recovered with new lettings and renewals. We increased income by £2 million pounds from rent reviews.

Overall therefore, we have seen a 2% fall over the last two years.

In the circumstances and given the severity of the recession, this is not a bad result. Secondary locations have undoubtedly suffered more.

In France the picture is much stronger…

35

35

Increased Retail Rents in France

98.2m

91.5m

(1.0)m4.5m

13.3m

(10.1)m

80

85

90

95

100

Terminationsand expiries

New lettings and renewals

Indexation Rents passing31 Dec 2009

Rents passing31 Dec 2007

Other

€ million

Note:

Movement in passing rents compared on a like-for-like basis

Over the same 24 month period like-for-like passing rent figures moved from €92 million at the end of December 2007 to €98 million at the end of 2009.

We lost €10 million through terminations and expiries but achieved good growth through new lettings and indexation.

Moving on to the retail parks…

36

36

Retail Parks

Cleveland Retail Park, Middlesbrough• 6,000 m2

• Cost: £18 million

• Average rent: £250/m2

• 100% let

Westwood Retail Park, Thanet

• 5,300 m2

• Cost: £16 million

• Average rent: £240/m2

• 100% let

Fife Central Retail Park, Kirkcaldy

• 11,000 m2

• Cost: £25 million

• Average rent: £230/m2

• 100% let

They don’t always get quite such headline billing, but we are very proud at what we have achieved in some of these properties.

This is an excellent part of our business.

The slide shows three extensions we completed over the summer of 2009 and they are all now 100% let.

Our retail parks portfolio has just a 3.5% vacancy compared to the 14% in the market. In addition, our average rent is around £17/ft2 is very affordable. This just proves that you can attract demand from retailers if you offer cost effective space in the right location.

And moving on to the offices…

37

37

London Office Market

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

City of London West End

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

milli

on ft

2

Take-up Completions

Prime yield City vs. West End

Take up and completions in City of London

Rental values and vacancy rate in City of London

Source: CBRE, PMASource: PMA, CBRE Source: CBRE

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

£ /

ft2

Vacancy rate (LHS) Headline rents (RHS)

It is well known that rents have been low and incentives have been high in London over the course of the last year.

We believe, like others, that the market is turning.

The two buildings which we had been letting throughout 2009 are now both effectively fully let, and we have two excellent prospective City developments, so we are well positioned to benefit from a recovery.

So in summary, we have a prime modern portfolio with low vacancy which is well positioned to benefit from market recovery and long term growth.

38

38

Transactions and Developments

Before I hand over to Peter, a word on the background to some of our recent transactions.

Around the middle of last year, it was clear that the banks werebeginning to think about deleveraging their exposure to commercial real estate. At the same time, Peter Cole and his team were tasked with forging strong working relationships with those banks.

Our aim is to benefit by:

• Buying assets with growth potential where we can add value i.e. better than average recovery stock OR

• Working alongside banks where they need particular property expertise

I think there are three reasons that Hammerson is a good partner for the banks and investors.

First, we have capital that we can put into transaction.

Second, we have great expertise in both retail and London offices.

Thirdly, and this is an important point, we have a good reputation as a partner.

I’ll hand over to Peter to talk through the transactions…

[Peter to do an intro]

39

39

Silverburn, Glasgow

• 91,000 m2 centre with 98 retail units

• Cost: £152 million*

• Initial yield: 5.8%

• 50% joint venture with CPPIB

• High occupancy level of 97% with high quality tenants

• Average unexpired lease term of 12 years

• Rents reversionary

• Potential extension and development

• Marginal cost of finance in 2010 around 1.5%

Note:

*Hammerson’s share

Thank you David. I will run through our three recent transactions which I believe have enhanced all areas of our business, investment, development and management. I will then review our development programme.

Firstly Silverburn. We purchased a 50% share in December. We hadbeen tracking this during the last year as it was a recently completed high quality development that was well let, had high occupancy, provided large flexible modern units and was becoming established as a dominant regional centre for Glasgow, benefiting from its motorway location and 4,500 free car parking spaces.

What attracted us was the potential. We believe there are opportunities to actively asset manage and further improve the centre. We think turnover can be increased and rents are currently reversionary and will show further growth. There is extension and development potential.

We are pleased to be partnering CPPIB. Our view is that you need to have demonstrable expertise to be a partner of choice for such organisations, and at the same time be able to commit significant capital.

Lastly, because of the low cost of our current financing the acquisition is accretive to earnings in 2010.

40

40

Les Terrasses du Port, Marseille

• 52,000 m2 centre with 150 stores

• Total development cost: £400 million

• Net rental income £29 million

• 44% of the retail space prelet by income

• Largest shopping centre development anticipated in France in the next few years

• Benefiting from government-backed programme to regenerate Marseille

• Four other development pipeline opportunities

Next the Marseille development.

We also purchased in December the Terrasses du Port scheme. This was part of a portfolio of development schemes which had been owned by ForumInvest, a Dutch company, who decided to exit the French market.

This will be one of the largest shopping centre development in France in the next few years. The total development cost is anticipated to be £400 million with an anticipated annual income of £29 million on completion.

Retail demand for the city is strong and already over 40% of the projected rental income has been secured.

Marseille is benefiting from substantial government backed regeneration and is in one of the fastest growing regions in Europe.

The Terrasses du Port scheme will provide high quality retail and leisure space benefiting from its sea front location with direct access to the auto routes.

We are currently refining the scheme’s design and anticipate a start of construction towards the end of the year which will result in a completion in early 2014.

The four other pipeline projects in the portfolio are at an early stage and we are currently reviewing their potential.

41

41

Thornfield Ventures Limited Administration

• Principal asset: The Rock, Bury

• Hammerson appointed in development and asset management capacity

• Fees receivable

• No financial commitment by Hammerson

• Evaluating other schemes in the portfolio

Finally, Thornfield. This management agreement was our third deal, signed in January 2010.

Thornfield Ventures Limited was put into administration. Its principal asset was a shopping centre development scheme in Bury in Lancashire. We have been appointed to complete that development and to undertake the letting and asset management of the scheme thereafter.

The team of people who have just finished the Union Square development in Aberdeen were able to take on this project with limited additional cost to the business.

We will receive fees for this project and are also working with the administrators to review Thornfield’s other schemes.

Moving on to update on our recently completed developments...

42

42

60 Threadneedle Street, London

•100% let or in solicitors’hands

125 Old Broad Street, London

•91% let

O’Parinor, Paris•99% let

Recent Developments

Union Square, Aberdeen

•73% let

Highcross, Leicester

•94% let

Cabot Circus, Bristol•95% let

Note:

Let by income at 31 December 2009.

We have made good progress in letting these in what has been a difficult market.

As you can see, all these schemes are now virtually fully let and I would draw your attention to the 2009 completions where 60 Threadneedle Street is now 100% let or in solicitors’ hands and Union Square, Aberdeen which was completed in October and is trading well.

Looking now at our future development pipeline…

43

43

Progressing Developments

Rue du Faubourg St Honoré,

Paris

• Total development cost: £30 million

• Started in early 2010• Fully pre-let

Les Terrasses du Port,

Marseille

• Total development cost:£400 million

• Anticipated start late 2010• 44% pre-let

Bishops Place,

London

• Detailed planning consentreceived

Cricklewood Brent Cross,

London

• Resolution to grant received

Watermark WestQuay,

Southampton

• Outline planning consent achieved

• Development Agreement signed

We have made encouraging progress since the half year. I’ve already talked about the Marseille scheme which will be our nextmajor development. The other project this year is the redevelopment at Faubourg St Honoré in Paris which we have started at an anticipated cost of some £30 million. It’s now fully prelet to a range of excellent retailers and the total rental uplift from the refurbishment is £2.5million. Completion is due at the end of this year.

On our future projects, we have reached some important milestones whilst limiting further cost.

We achieved planning at Bishops Place and Brent Cross/Cricklewood in London and also for the WestQuay extension in Southampton where we have now also signed a development agreement.

We’ve also continued to refine our other schemes such as Leeds, to reflect market conditions and I believe the pipeline will present us with some very attractive opportunities to bring forward over the next few years when market conditions are appropriate.

With that I’ll hand over to David to conclude.

44

44

Conclusion and Outlook

Thanks Peter

I think what’s clear is that while all of those transactions are very different in their nature, the common theme is that we wereable to bring a combination of capital, expertise and credibility that few could match.

So let me wrap up…

45

45

Conclusion and Outlook

� Focus on strong retail locations in UK and France

� Flexing the office portfolio in line with market cycle

� Focus on the customer, income, and cost efficiency

� Rigorous evaluation of assets

� Advance development pipeline

� Capitalise on opportunities in current markets

� Combination of prime portfolio, financial flexibility and expertise will lead to outperformance and attractive shareholder returns

We have a clear strategy to focus on top quality retail in UK and France, flexing the office portfolio in both countries.

We will enhance income by focusing on our customers, on asset management and on cost efficiency.

We will rigorously evaluate the portfolio to ensure that we meetour benchmark returns.

We’ll pursue developments, but only where we see appropriate returns, and we will continue to capitalise on market opportunities.

In summary, our combination of a prime, modern portfolio, financial flexibility and industry expertise will lead to asset outperformance and attractive shareholder returns.

Now over to you for questions…

46

46

Questions

47

47

Executive Committee

Simon Melliss

Chief Financial OfficerDavid Atkins

Chief Executive

Peter Cole

Chief Investment Officer

Lawrence Hutchings

UK Retail

Jean-Philippe Mouton

France

Martin Jepson

UK Offices

Plc Board

Executive Directors

Managing Directors

48

48

Investment Portfolio Yields

6.8% -0.1%

8.1% +1.7%

5.8% +0.7%

France

5.9% +0.7%7.0% -0.1%

Shopping Centres

7.1% +0.1%

Retail Parks

Offices

UK

6.9% -0.6%

Total

Note:

True equivalent yields at 31 December 2009 and the change compared to 31 December 2008.

49

49

Change in Net Debt

£ million

£584 m

£780 m

£177 m£2,124 m

72% gearing

£3,333 m

118% gearing

£22 m

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500Net debt31 Dec 2008

Disposals andassociated debt

Rights issue proceeds

Acquisitions and associated debt

Net debt31 Dec 2009

Other movements

50

50

Top Ten Properties as at 31/12/09

Property name Ownership Valuation(1)

£m

Passing

rent(1)(2)

£m

O’Parinor, Aulnay-sous-Bois

Italie 2, Paris 13ème

Brent Cross, London NW4

Highcross, Leicester

Bullring, Birmingham

Cabot Circus, Bristol

Espace St. Quentin, St Quentin-en-Yvelines

The Oracle, Reading

Les Trois Fontaines, Cergy Pontoise

WestQuay, Southampton

100%

100%

41%

60%

33%

50%

100%

50%

100%

50%

404

356

257

254

234

215

212

208

199

198

21.6

19.5

17.2

15.8

15.4

14.3

12.7

13.1

11.9

13.4

Notes:

1) Hammerson’s share of valuation and passing rent shown in respect of joint ventures

2) Passing rents are at the end of rent free periods and after deducting head and equity rents

51

51

For the year ended 31 Dec 2009 2008

Adjusted earnings per share 19.7p 25.8p(1)

Total dividend per share 15.45p 18.9p(1)

Adjusted Earnings£ million

Loss before tax (453.1) (1,611.5)

Adjustments:

Loss on sale of investment properties 163.4 32.5

Revaluation losses on property portfolio 444.1 1,649.9

Other exceptionals (28.5) 15.9

Change in fair value of derivatives 4.1 26.9

583.1 1,725.2

Adjusted profit before tax 130.0 113.7

Current tax and minority interests (4.7) (3.4)

Adjusted earnings 125.3 110.3

Note:

1) Restated following rights issue.

52

52

UK: Retail Lease Expiries

� 22% of the UK total retail passing rent of £177 million expiring before end 2014

� £7.2 million reversion on leases expiring before end 2014

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

ERV uplift 4.1 0.8 0.5 0.4 1.4

Passing Rent 10.1 6.3 4.6 8.0 10.6

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

£ million

53

53

France: Retail Lease Expiries

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

ERV uplift 2.7 0.7 0.4 0.1 0.3

Passing Rent 20.2 11.5 11.9 7.8 7.4

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

£ million

� 60% of total France retail passing rent of £98 million expiring between 2010-2014

� £4.2 million reversion on leases expiring before end of 2014

54

54

Contracted Income

£ million

Note:

Figures show Hammerson’s share of the income for joint ventures.

2009 2010 2011 2012

Offices - UK 2.2 3.7 6.2 8.4

Shopping centres - UK 14.7 25.8 31.1 31.9

Retail parks - UK 0.8 4.4 4.7 4.8

Retail France 7.8 8.7 10.2 11.6

Total – cash flow

- accounting basis

25.5

37.9

42.6

55.3

52.2

58.2

56.7

59.6

55

55

Disclaimer

This presentation contains certain statements that are neither reported financial results nor other historical information. These statements are forward-looking in nature and are subject to risks and uncertainties. Actual future results may differ materially from those expressed in or implied by these statements.

Many of these risks and uncertainties relate to factors that are beyond Hammerson's ability to control or estimate precisely, such as future market conditions, currency fluctuations, the behaviour of other market participants, the actions of governmental regulators and other risk factors such as the Company's ability to continue to obtain financing to meet its liquidity needs, changes in the political, social and regulatory framework in which the Company operates or in economic or technological trends or conditions, including inflation and consumer confidence, on a global, regional or national basis.

Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date of this document. Hammerson does not undertake any obligation to publicly release any revisions to these forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of these materials. Information contained in this presentation relating to the Company or its share price, or the yield on its shares, should not be relied upon as a guide to future performance.