2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782025-05-012026-04-302138009OQSSLVVHQAL782024-05-012025-04-30iso4217:GBPxbrli:sharesiso4217:GBP2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782026-04-302138009OQSSLVVHQAL782025-04-302138009OQSSLVVHQAL782025-04-30ifrs-full:IssuedCapitalMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782025-04-30ifrs-full:SharePremiumMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782025-04-30ifrs-full:CapitalRedemptionReserveMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782025-04-30ifrs-full:OtherReservesMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782025-04-30ifrs-full:RetainedEarningsMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782025-05-012026-04-30ifrs-full:IssuedCapitalMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782025-05-012026-04-30ifrs-full:SharePremiumMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782025-05-012026-04-30ifrs-full:CapitalRedemptionReserveMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782025-05-012026-04-30ifrs-full:OtherReservesMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782025-05-012026-04-30ifrs-full:RetainedEarningsMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782026-04-30ifrs-full:IssuedCapitalMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782026-04-30ifrs-full:SharePremiumMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782026-04-30ifrs-full:CapitalRedemptionReserveMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782026-04-30ifrs-full:OtherReservesMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782026-04-30ifrs-full:RetainedEarningsMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782024-04-30ifrs-full:IssuedCapitalMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782024-04-30ifrs-full:SharePremiumMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782024-04-30ifrs-full:CapitalRedemptionReserveMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782024-04-30ifrs-full:OtherReservesMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782024-04-30ifrs-full:RetainedEarningsMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782024-04-302138009OQSSLVVHQAL782024-05-012025-04-30ifrs-full:IssuedCapitalMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782024-05-012025-04-30ifrs-full:SharePremiumMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782024-05-012025-04-30ifrs-full:CapitalRedemptionReserveMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782024-05-012025-04-30ifrs-full:OtherReservesMember2138009OQSSLVVHQAL782024-05-012025-04-30ifrs-full:RetainedEarningsMember
Homes. Communities. People.
2026 AnnuAl report
Contents
STRATEGIC REPORT
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Read more on
pages 02 to 93
Read more on
pages 94 to 161
Read more on
pages 162 to 234
London Dock,
Wapping
At London Dock we have transformed a
previously closed-off site into a vibrant
part of Wapping with 7.5 acres of carefully
designed public space. This project will
deliver 2,000 private and affordable
homes, a local secondary school, and
the restoration of the Grade II Listed
Pennington Street Warehouse.
Front cover
Top left: Heron Wharf, Poplar
Top right: Regent’s View, Bethnal Green
Bottom: King’s Road Park, Fulham
01 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
01 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Who we are
Berkeley builds homes
and neighbourhoods across
London, Birmingham and
the South of England.
Brownfield focus
We fulfil our purpose through long-term
brownfield regeneration.
We believe that reviving underused urban land
is the most sustainable form of development,
delivering good green homes where they are
needed most, and driving the growth and
productivity our country needs.
Read more on
pages 12 and 13
Our purpose
Our passion and purpose is to build quality
homes, strengthen communities and make
apositive difference to people’s lives.
We use our sustained commercial success
tomake valuable and enduring contributions
that benefit all of our stakeholders.
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
Her Majesty The Queen opening
Mulberry Academy London Dock
Credit Simon Jarratt Photography
02 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT02 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Strategic Report
Pages
02–93
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
03 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
STRATEGIC REPORT
04 | Highlights of the year
06 | 50 years of leadership
and innovation
08 | Executive Chair’s Statement
10 | Driving growth and value
12 | Brownfield regeneration at scale
14 | Case study | Alexandra Gate
16 | Business model
18 | Chief Executive’s Review
28 | Market overview
31 | Trading and Financial Review
34 | Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
36 | Responsible business at a glance
38 | Our Vision
57 | The Berkeley Foundation
58 | ESG performance
60 | Climate-related disclosures
77 | Nature-related disclosures
78 | Section 172(1) Statement
79 | Non-financial and Sustainability
Information Statement
80 | How we manage risk
81 | Principal risks
82 | Financial risks
83 | Viability Statement
84 | Risk tables
Horlicks Quarter,
Slough
The regeneration of the former Horlicks
factory site has created a distinctive new
neighbourhood within a short walk of
Slough Elizabeth Line Station. The iconic
factory, clock tower and chimney have
been carefully restored to form the historic
heart of the Horlicks Quarter, which will
deliver 1,300 private and affordable homes,
high quality public open spaces and
gardens, and a new community square,
nursery and café.
04 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Highlights of the year
90%
of homes delivered
during the yearare
on regenerated
brownfield land
Brownfield
91%
of homes had zero or fewer
than five defects reported
by customers, compared to
31% across the industry (HBF,
March 2026)
Quality
4,076
homes delivered (plus 127 in
jointventures and 187 Build to
Rent homes), including some
10% of London’s new private
and affordable homes
Homes delivered
30
long-term regeneration
sites, of which 24 are under
construction
Regeneration
>1,200
acres of new or measurably
improved natural habitats
across 56 biodiversity net
gain sites committed to date
Regreening cities
£530m
of subsidies provided to
deliver affordable housing and
committed to wider community
and infrastructure benefit
Community benefit
Communities
+77. 9
Net Promoter Score (NPS)
from our customers, compared
to an industry average of
+61.4 (In-house Research,
December2025)
Customer satisfaction
8.5%
of our employees are
graduates, apprentices
orsponsored students
Skills and training
27,300
UK jobs supported per annum
over the last five years,
an average of 6.2 jobs per
completed home
Jobs
PeopleHomes
See our Trading and Financial
Review on pages 31 to 33
1 Read more about our alternative performance
measures on pages 216 to 218 (Note 2.25)
Financial highlights
£451m
2025 | £529m
Profit before tax
12.5%
2025 | 14.9%
Pre-tax return on equity
1
£363m
2025 | £337m
Net cash
£39.17
2025 | £35.95
Net asset value per share
1
£1,006m
2025 | £1,403m
Cash due on
forward sales
1
£6,442m
2025 | £6,722m
Future gross margin
in land holdings
1
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
05 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
FTSE4Good
Listed since 2003
MSCI ESG Rating 2026
AAA Leader
ISS STOXX ESG Corporate
Rating 2026
Prime status
White City Living
Berkeley is proudly celebrating half a century of
creating high quality homes, pioneering brownfield
regeneration and shaping sustainable places where
communities thrive.
S&P Global Corporate
Sustainability Assessment 2025
Member of Dow Jones Best-
in-Class (DJBIC) World and
Europe Indices; Sustainability
Yearbook Member: Top 5%
S&P Global CSA Score and
Industry Mover
Sustainalytics ESG Risk
Rating 2025
Industry ESG Leader and
Industry Low Carbon Leader
Celebrating 50 years
of creating homes and places
CDP Corporate A List 2025
Climate Change and Water
Security
Read more on
pages 6 and 7
06 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Berkeley was founded
in 1976 by Tony Pidgley
CBE and Jim Farrer.
Their vision was for
a very different kind
of homebuilder – one
that strives to delight
customers through
exceptional quality,
relentless attention to
detail, and a level of
service and care that did
not exist in the housing
industry at the time.
50 years of
leadership
and
innovation
1976
Berkeley
founded in
Weybridge,
Surrey
50 years of driving progress
1986
Listed on the
London Stock
Exchange
following a
decade of
growth
1990
Takes on first
major urban
regeneration
sites
1996
Forms
innovative joint
venture to
transform
Thames Water
utility sites
2006
Forms
regeneration
joint venture
with M&G
Investments
2008
Receives first
Queen’s Award
for Enterprise:
Sustainable
Development
2010
Launches
pioneering
‘Our Vision’
responsible
business
strategy
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
07 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
Fifty years on, this founding
philosophy and entrepreneurial
culture remain deeply embedded
in Berkeley and have driven our
growth and evolution. Throughout
our journey, we have continued
to lead, innovate and take on the
challenges and opportunities
that matter most.
From build quality, placemaking
and urban regeneration, to
community building, climate
action, nature recovery and health
and safety, our highly talented
teams have consistently pushed
boundaries and set the standards
for our industry.
Our 50
th
anniversary is an
opportunity to celebrate this
legacy, our exceptional people,
and the high quality homes and
neighbourhoods that define
Berkeley today.
Strengthening
our brand
This milestone also provides a
natural opportunity to evolve and
consolidate our customer-facing
brands under our original and
defining identity: Berkeley.
Operating under our most trusted
and recognised brand strengthens
its impact and simplifies how
we engage with our customers
and stakeholders. It creates a
clearer, more consistent identity,
supporting stronger relationships
and enhancing our reputation in
the years ahead.
2026
The UK’s leading regeneration
specialist, with 30 long-term
brownfield sites
Delivering 10% of all new
homes in London
Industry-leading customer
satisfaction scores
Industry-leading build
quality standards
Double ‘A’ rating for Climate
Change and Water Security
from CDP
2011
Forms the
Berkeley
Foundation,
with a unique
long-term
charity
partnership
model
2014
Forms joint
venture with
National Grid
to transform
disused
gasworks
Receives second
Queen’s Award
for Enterprise:
Sustainable
Development
2016
Launches
pioneering
biodiversity
net gain (BNG)
initiative –
leading
to a national
roll out
2020
Sets science-
based targets
for carbon
reduction
Wins RoSPA’ s
Diamond Award
for exceptional
health and safety
leadership
2024
Establishes
Berkeley Living
Build to Rent
platform
08 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Executive Chair’s Statement
I’m honoured to chair Berkeley in our
50
th
year. Today, we stand proudly as the
country’s leading brownfield regeneration
specialist and sustainable placemaker.
Our model is unique. We invest for the
long term. We unlock wasted land at scale.
We reenergise the urban economies.
And we deliver good green homes
wherethey are needed most.
Urban regeneration is a powerful
force for good and the only route to
sustainable growth.
Rob Perrins | Executive Chair
Berkeley has delivered £451 million
pre-tax profit for the year, with net
cash increasing to £363 million,
after £233 million of share buy-
backs, and closing net asset value
per share up 9% to £39.17. This
robust performance, which is in line
with guidance, reflects the focused
execution of our Berkeley 2035
strategy, disciplined cost control
and our agile response to extremely
challenging macro-economic and
regulatory conditions.
We delivered 4,203 good green
homes within the most under-
supplied regions of the UK,
with 90% built on underused
brownfield land within designated
regeneration areas. Our projects
contributed £530 million in
subsidies to deliver affordable
housing and commitments
to wider infrastructure and
community benefits this year.
Few business models deliver this
level of public good.
In the current environment, our
focus is on maximising long-term
shareholder value by optimising
our existing land holdings through
replanning to restore and enhance
margins, rather than acquiring new
sites; controlling operating costs;
tightly sequencing construction
in line with prevailing demand;
and flexing the pace of Build
to Rent (BTR) investment. This
prioritisation of cash generation
and disciplined capital allocation
will allow us to continue with
shareholder returns, increasing the
cadence of share buy-backs where
the share price is below net asset
value per share.
Resilient operating
performance in a volatile
environment
Long-term London
market fundamentals
underpin shareholder
valueproposition
Robust financial position
with net cash increasing
to£363 million
Current high tax and
regulatory burden resulting
in London building less than
10% ofthe homes itneeds
Focus on cash generation
provides opportunity for
enhanced share buy-backs
In its desire to stimulate economic
growth, the Government has done
an excellent job in restoring the
fundamentals of housing policy,
which had been abandoned by its
predecessor. It has also tried to
address the viability challenge with
the Homes for London package
which can make a huge difference
if implemented constructively and
with urgency.
However, it now takes at least eight
years to complete an apartment
building in the capital from the
point of acquisition, through
planning, agreement of Section
106 requirements, consultation
with statutory consultees,
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
09 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Royal Arsenal Riverside, Woolwich
clearance of pre-commencement
conditions, detailed design,
Building Safety Regulator (BSR)
approval and construction. Ten
years ago, it took five years. A
further 18 months is required for
an appeal or call-in. There is no
certainty that a planning consent
will be secured at the end of this
process as our recent experience
at Peckham demonstrates where
the Inspectorate determined that
the Peckham Rye conservation
area would suffer too much harm
from new housing on the site of a
run-down shopping centre. This
after ten years of engagement on
a site allocated for housing in the
localplan.
Every part of the system needs to
work to reduce the time taken to
get buildings into development and
allow homebuilders to make a return
commensurate with the risk that can
attract the necessary investment
capital. Currently more homes are
being lost to other uses than being
built. This can be addressed with
the necessary policy changes and
strong political leadership.
Demand for and supply of new
homes has been hit by over ten
years of continual SDLT increases
and new surcharges. Introduced
by stealth during a period when
interest rates were 0.25%, these
taxes have curtailed the early
investment in new homes since
interest rates began to normalise
at the end of 2022. It is this early
investment that provides the
necessary certainty for brownfield
sites with their considerable
upfront costs to come forward,
thereby providing London with the
new affordable homes and homes
for rent it so desperately needs.
SDLT should be reduced on all
new homes to a maximum of 3%
(zero for first-time buyers) and
the SDLT surcharges that deter
the vital investment in new build
homes so damagingly should
be removed. These changes will
be fiscally neutral or better due
to the considerable increase in
tax revenues generated from
greater transactional activity
and by stimulating additional
homebuilding which drives
corporation tax (which is 29% on
all residential property developers’
profits) and payroll taxes (direct
and throughout the supply chain).
In the longer term, London’s outlook is hugely compelling and the city’s
core strengths and appeal remain firmly intact. The capital is a true
global hub, the largest financial centre in Europe and the second largest
in the world. It offers security, heritage, and investment potential in an
uncertain global environment.
Berkeley’s performance is
driven by the passion, skill and
commitment of our people.
They continue to deliver
hugely positive outcomes for
communities, the economy
and the environment in the
most challenging of conditions,
and I would like to thank them
on behalf of the Board and
shareholders.
Rob Perrins | Executive Chair
23 June 2026
These structural supply and demand challenges have left London
delivering less than 10% of its MHCLG annual new homes target,
with no prospect of material improvement without more decisive
intervention as it is clear that policy changes to date are not feeding
through to delivery. Specifically:
1. The Homes for London package should be fully implemented
forthwith and remain in place until London’s housing numbers
are restored.
2. The time taken to deliver new apartment buildings needs to
reduce from eight to five years, which it was ten years ago. This
requires recognition of the appropriate required development
return, with equitable review mechanisms that incentivise
development. In addition, Section 106 mechanisms should be
objectively assessed in a timely fashion with competing policy
requirements and layering removed.
3. The excessive tax burden, that was introduced in a different
economic paradigm, must be reduced to unlock demand and
attract the essential investment without which regeneration
schemes cannot proceed.
4. All regulators, including the BSR, need to be appropriately
resourced to meet targeted statutory deadlines.
If these measures are introduced, London can meet its housing
targets, tax revenues will grow and national GDP will increase by 1%.
10 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Driving growth and value
EY completes an Economic Impact
Assessment each year based on
Berkeley’s financial data as well
aspublicly available statistics.
Berkeley specialises in unlocking the long-term value
of derelict and underused urban land. Our carefully
chosen brownfield sites are located within existing
communities, where new investment can deliver
greater economic, social and environmental value.
These pages summarise the key benefits of our
brownfield focused model over the last five years.
Economic value
EY’s independent Economic
Impact Assessment of Berkeley’s
activities highlights the following
keycontributions:
£13.7bn
GDP
Berkeley’s contribution to UK GDP was £2.7 billion
in 2025/26 and £13.7 billion for the last five years.
£4.0bn
tax
Berkeley’s total tax contribution was £0.8 billion in
2025/26 and £4.0 billion during the last five years.
This includes taxes paid directly by Berkeley and the
taxes paid by its customers and suppliers as a result
ofBerkeley’s activities.
27,300
jobs
Berkeley has supported, on average, 27,300 UK jobs
per annum directly and indirectly through its supply
chain overthe last five years.
21,915
homes
Berkeley delivered 4,203 private and affordable
homes and completed a further 187 homes for
BerkeleyLiving in 2025/26, and a total of 21,915
overthelast five years (including joint ventures).
£2.6bn
community contribution
Berkeley made a community contribution of £0.5 billion
in 2025/26 and around £2.6 billion over the last five years.
This includes £2.2 billion in affordable housing subsidies
andadditional payments of £0.4 billion to fundlocal
facilitiesand services.
On average, every new home built
by Berkeley in the last five years
has generated £300,000 of value
to thestate through taxation and
contributions tothecommunity.
EY 2026 Economic Impact Assessment
Regent’s View, Bethnal Green
11 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Social value
>1,350
apprenticeships
Berkeley has supported more than 1,350 apprenticeships
in the last five years, including approximately 350 directly
and more than 1,000 gaining experience working on our
sites through our contractor workforce.
10%
of London homes
Berkeley delivered some 10% of all private and
affordable homes built in London over the last
five years. This is where new homes are needed most.
88%
of homes on brownfield sites
Berkeley has delivered 88% of new homes on brownfield
land over the last five years, with 90% of homes delivered
in 2025/26 on regenerated brownfield land.
>200,000
people engaged
Berkeley teams have engaged with more than 200,000
people in the last five years and more than 87,500 people
in 2025/26 through a mix of community engagement
activities, site tours, school visits and careers fairs.
550
community facilities
Berkeley is delivering a range of community facilities
on live development sites, including indoor community
spaces, schools, shops, sports facilitiesand children’s
playspaces.
Environmental value
>1,200 acres
of natural habitats
Berkeley is set to deliver more than 1,200 acres of
new or measurably improved natural habitats across
the 56 sites with biodiversity net gain plans in place
to date, helping to regreen our towns and cities.
>80
embodied carbon
assessments
Berkeley has completed more than 80 embodied carbon
assessments over the last five years, which are enabling
our teams to understand and drive down carbon emissions.
15%
water saving
Berkeley incorporates water savingfeaturesin new
homes and developments. Over the last five years our
homes have been, on average, 15% more water efficient
than building regulations requirements.
49
community plans
Our teams follow a Communities Framework which
enables a structured approach to building stronger
communities, setting out local needs, an action plan,
events, governance and stewardship. Over the last
five years, 49 community plans have been created.
In2025/26 there were 45 active plans in place across
ourlive sites.
Hartland Village, Fleet
12 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
London
Bridge
Waterloo
St.Pancras
Paddington
City
Airport
Heathrow
Victoria
2
3
4
20
10
7
8
17
2
19
23
22
5
1
24
21
18
14
15
12
11
3
13
16
5
6
4
1
9
6
Brownfield
regeneration
at scale
In production
1 Alexandra Gate, Haringey
2 Beaufort Park, Hendon
3 Bermondsey Place, Southwark
4 Bow Green
5 Camden Goods Yard
6 Grand Union, Brent
7 Green Park Village, Reading
8 Hartland Village, Fleet
9 Heron Wharf, Poplar
10 Horlicks Quarter, Slough
11 Kidbrooke Village, Greenwich
12 King’s Road Park, Fulham
13 Lombard Square, Plumstead
14 London Dock, Wapping
15 Oval Village
16 Royal Arsenal Riverside, Woolwich
17 Silkstream, Barnet
18 South Quay Plaza, Docklands
19 The Exchange, Watford
20 The Green Quarter, Ealing
21 TwelveTrees Park, Newham
22 West End Gate, Paddington
23 White City Living
24 Woodberry Down, FinsburyPark
* Pipeline sites
Future sites
1 Aylesham Centre, Peckham*
2 Borough Triangle
3 Bromley-by-Bow
4 Queensmere, Slough
5 Sutton Garden Square
6 Syon Lane, Brentford*
Berkeley is the only large UK homebuilder to align with the Government’s
brownfield-first housingagenda. We are taking forward 30 complex
regeneration projects. Each will deliver much needed new homes,
alongside new investment in public infrastructure, amenities and the
greenopen spaces a strong community needs.
Read more about
Alexandra Gate on pages 14 and 15
King’s Road Park, Fulham
13 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Meeting housing needs –
Our sites are concentrated in London and
other severely undersupplied towns and
cities where the housing crisis is atits worst.
Driving economic growth –
Our investment is focused within established
urban economies, delivering greater growth
and productivitybenefits.
Strengthening communities –
We deliver new homes, jobs, amenities
and infrastructure in the heart of existing
communities where they are most needed.
Regreening cities –
Ourprojects bring nature andbiodiversity
back to neglected urban sites, reducecar
dependency and preserve thecountryside.
Skills and social mobility –
By investing in designated regeneration
areas we createa lasting source of
skills training and job opportunities to
disadvantagedcommunities.
Key benefits of urban regeneration
14 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Case study | Alexandra Gate
At Alexandra Gate, Berkeley is transforming a derelict 12-acre
gasworks into a green and welcoming mixed-use neighbourhood
with over 1,800 private and affordable homes, 125,000 square
feet of commercial space, and 2.5 acres of parks and public
open space.
Patient capital
Work began in 2017, with Berkeley
investing £98 million in upfront
capital to create a place prior to
completing the first home.
Placemaking in action
Over 800 much-needed private and
affordable homes have now been
delivered, along with a community
hall, nursery, food store, coffee
shop and the popular Hornsey
Park. More than 600 jobs and 33
apprenticeships have been created
on site and the masterplan has
evolved to include 187 Build to
Rent homes, which form part
of the Berkeley Living portfolio.
Driving sustainable growth
Alexandra Gate is a designated
brownfield site within the Haringey
Heartlands Opportunity Area,
sustainably located close to local
tube and rail stations, and the
established amenities of Wood
Green. Berkeley’s early investment
has driven wider regeneration and
growth in this part of North London.
12-acre
derelict brownfield site
£98m
upfront capital investment
>1,800
private and affordable homes
2.5 acres
public space for Wood Green
150%
biodiversity net gain
Delivering homes
and growth in the
heart of Haringey
Before regeneration
15 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
16 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Business model
Our values
Excellence through detail
Be passionate
Respect people
Think creatively
Have integrity
Read more about our culture
and values on pages 106 and 107
Added-value development company
Berkeley is a unique asset-focused development business
that seeks to manage risk and generate long-term value
through market cycles, via its land and planning strategy
andgreat placemaking.
We seek to find the optimum development solution for
each site in terms of both the social, environmental and
economic value for all stakeholders, and the returns we
deliver to our shareholders. We firmly believe these two
are mutually compatible and reinforcing.
Berkeley’s inherent value is rooted in its land holdings
and the pace at which homes are delivered is determined
by the prevailing operating environment. Berkeley will
always adopt a long-term approach to value creation,
prioritising financial strength which brings optionality
to capital allocation.
Capital allocation policy
First, ensure financial strength reflects the cyclical
nature andcomplexity of brownfield development and
is appropriate for the prevailing operating environment.
Second, invest in thebusiness (new land and work-in-
progress, including Build to Rent assets) atthe right time.
Third,make returns to shareholders through dividends
andshare buy-backs.
Read more about our
investment case on page 19
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
17 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Our Vision responsible
business strategy
— Drives our performance, fosters innovation
and leads to lasting positive impacts for
society and the natural world
— A strategic approach across five priority
areas: customers and homes; places and
communities; climate and nature; people
and culture; and operational excellence
— Focus on urban brownfield regeneration,
which is inherently sustainable, socially
inclusive and supports a lower carbon
model for modern living
Land acquisition
— Acquire land at the right time in the cycle,
targeting sites where we can add value over
the long term through our regeneration and
placemaking expertise
— Adopt an innovative approach to partnering
with land owners, such aswith joint venture
partners and localauthorities
— Focus on complex, large-scale brownfield
sites in undersupplied markets where
we can take a bespoke approach to
each development
Designing and
planning new homes
— Reputation for successful regeneration
delivery underpins the planning process
— Embrace a highly collaborative approach
toplacemaking
— Design unique and beautiful places
in partnership with local authorities
andcommunities
— Continually evolve development plans
to generate the best outcome for
allstakeholders
Building new homes
and places
— Consistent health and safety, building safety
and quality assurance standards embedded
into operations
— Highly experienced and expert in-house site
management teams and direct partnerships
with building trades, rather than main
contractor-led sites
— Utilising modern methods of construction
and investing in digital technologies to
enhance and modernise our production
processes
Marketing and selling
new homes
— Berkeley’s brand leadership and reputation
for lasting product quality provides a clear
competitive advantage in core markets
— Diversified sales channels across
owner-occupiers, private and institutional
investors, retirement living and affordable
housing providers
— Berkeley Living brings our reputation
for quality, craftsmanship and service to
undersupplied rental markets
Placekeeping
and stewardship
— Demonstrable long-term track record
of high levels ofcustomer service
andsatisfaction
— Long-term strategies for effective
estate and community management,
working in partnership with residents
andmanagingagents
18 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Chief Executive’s Review
We are the only large-scale UK homebuilder
focused on brownfield regeneration, which
is a vital driver of growth and a powerful
force for good in our towns and cities.
Richard Stearn | Chief Executive
Purpose,
Long-term
Strategy and
Capital Allocation
Berkeley’s purpose is to build
quality homes, strengthen
communities and make a positive
difference to people’s lives, using
our sustained commercial success
to make valuable and enduring
contributions to society, the
economy and the natural world.
We are the only large UK
homebuilder to prioritise
brownfield land, as we progress
30 of the country’s most complex
regeneration projects, 24 of
which are in delivery. Each of
these neighbourhoods is uniquely
designed in partnership with
local councils and communities
and includes valuable public
amenities and infrastructure,
alongside tenure-blind private
andaffordable homes.
All levels of government policy,
backed by a wealth of evidence,
clearly prioritises development
activity in designated urban
regeneration areas as the means
of increasing UK growth and
productivity, utilising existing
infrastructure, and improving
living standards and social
outcomes for disadvantaged
communities. This is also the most
popular form of development with
the public and there is a clear
consensus that building homes on
greenfield sites cannot deliver the
same level of economic, social or
environmental benefit.
Berkeley has made positive
progress across its urban
development portfolio in the year,
as we transform neglected land
into welcoming and sustainable
neighbourhoods.
At The Green Quarter in Ealing,
the former Southall Gasworks
has been stitched back into the
local community, with over 1,000
private and affordable homes
completed to date, alongside 5
acres of carefully designed parks,
playgrounds and playing fields,
a tree nursery and nature trail,
and a thriving Parkside Yards
community hub, which includes
a pub, restaurant, café, shop, dry
cleanersand community space.
£451m
£363m
£530m
£233m
£39.17
+77. 9
Profit before tax
Net cash
Affordable housing
and community
infrastructure subsidies
Shareholder returns
Net asset value
per share
Net promoter score
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
19 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Investment Case
Berkeley has a strong track record of delivery,
profitability and cash generation through market
cycles, reflecting its long-term business model,
which is underpinned by five key features:
Long-term
shareholder returns
290% TSR
(Total Shareholder Return)
since 1 January 2007
1
Only large UK homebuilder
focused on brownfield
regeneration at scale
— Delivering sustainable homes
and neighbourhoods on
brownfield land with
significant socio-economic
benefits
— Aligned with Government’s
brownfield first agenda
— Each project individually
designed in partnership
with local authorities and
communities
2
Core London and South East
markets are systemically
under-supplied
— London has global appeal,
withdeep and proven
demand
— Berkeley delivers over 10%
of London’s new private and
affordable homes each year
3
Financial strength provides
strategic optionality
— Net cash of £363 million,
with £1,200 million of debt
facilities (30 April 2026)
which was increased to
£1,400 million post year end
— Cash due on private forward
sales under exchanged
contracts of £1.0billion
— Land holdings estimated
future gross margin of £6.4
billion across 52,700 homes
4
Unrivalled land holdings
sustaining delivery profile
— Not under pressure to buy
land
— Over 70% of homes are in
London
— Over 90% of homes have
outline or full planning
consent
5
Added value developer
maximising returns on eachsite
— Bottom-up approach
which identifies the best
development solution and
maximises absolute returns
from each site
— Sales volumes important on a
site-by-site basis, but are
not the sole determinant for
creating value
— Instead, long-term value is
createdthrough the land and
planning strategy
— Financial risk managed
through land approach and
forward selling
— Agile and responsive to
the prevailing operating
environment
Our improved masterplan received
full planning consent in January
2026, increasing the total number
of private and affordable homes
to over 8,000 and unlocking
additional community benefits
forSouthall.
At Woodberry Down in Finsbury
Park our long-term estate
regeneration partnership with
the London Borough of Hackney
and Notting Hill Genesis has now
delivered more than 2,900 high
quality private and affordable
homes and over 40,000 sqft
of commercial and community
facilities, including a post office,
shops, cafés, restaurants, a
business centre for local SMEs,
and the hugely popular Redmond
Community Centre. Woodberry
Down is defined by its welcoming
natural landscape, including the
4.5-acre Spring Park, and by the
incredible Woodberry Wetlands
nature reserve which opened to
the public in 2016. Enabling works
for Phase 4 are now complete
and an enhanced masterplan
was approved in October 2025
increasing the total number of
homes to 6,500.
Berkeley is a unique, asset-focused
development business that seeks
to manage risk and generate value
through market cycles, with its
inherent latent value rooted in its
unrivalled land holdings. We seek
to find the optimum development
solution for each site in terms
of the social, environmental and
economic value for all stakeholders,
alongside the returns we deliver to
our shareholders. We firmly believe
these objectives are mutually
compatible and reinforcing.
The pace at which we deliver
homes from our land holdings
is determined by the prevailing
operating environment and we will
always adopt a long-term approach,
prioritising financial strength above
annual profit targets.
Our capital allocation policy is clear:
— First, ensure financial strength
reflects the cyclical nature
and complexity of brownfield
development and is appropriate
for the prevailing operating
environment;
— Second, invest in the business
(land and work in progress,
including Build to Rent assets)
at the right time; and
— Third, make returns to
shareholders through share
buy-backs and dividends.
20 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Chief Executive’s Review continued
Berkeley 2035 provides the agility to allocate
capital according to the prevailing macro-
economic and regulatory environment,
enabling the business to adjust swiftly in
volatile conditions, adjusting the emphasis on
each of the following key levers of long-term
value creation:
— Land investment and optimisation;
— Investment in construction work in progress
in the core business;
— Investment and growth in Berkeley Living
(BTR); and
— Shareholder returns.
1. New land investment
Berkeley does not currently
believe it can make its required
rate of return on investment in
new land acquisitions due to
the continuous increase in the
tax and regulatory burden on
residential development. We
have therefore stopped acquiring
new land while these conditions
prevail, except through joint
venture arrangements, and
will focus on our existing land
holdings It is counter-productive
that further taxes and tariffs,
such as the Building Safety Levy,
are due to be introduced into
this environment.
2. Existing land holdings
As a brownfield regeneration
specialist, Berkeley already
possesses unrivalled land
holdings comprising over
50,000 homes, with a further
pipeline of more than 10,000
homes, located in London and
the South East, the UK’s most
under-supplied markets. Our
focus will be on applying the
principles of the new Homes
for London package to our
sites to provide the certainty
required to bring forward our
long-term regeneration sites at
returns commensurate with the
development risk.
Our target under Berkeley 2035
is to add £2 billion of value to
these land holdings through
optimisation and bringing
our pipeline sites through the
planning process, against which
we have made good progress in
the last 12 months.
3. Investment in construction
work in progress
Construction phasing will
continue to be matched to
market demand and the pace
of Building Safety Regulator
approvals, ensuring disciplined
management of work-in-progress
and stock levels.
4. Investment in Berkeley Living
We are well advanced with
the first six Berkeley Living
communities, which are
located on our existing urban
regeneration sites within
areas of high rental demand.
When completed in FY28,
these six carefully designed
and professionally managed
developments will represent
an investment of around £400
million at cost. Our first three
Berkeley Living developments
have been launched to market,
with lettings velocity and rents
both performing strongly, and we
were delighted to welcome our
first residents to Foundry Yard at
Alexandra Gate in April.
We remain firmly committed to
our strategy to deliver 4,000
BTR homes by the end of FY35
and will review phasing of the
second tranche of schemes on
an ongoing basis, along with our
plans for recycling capital from
the initial six buildings as market
conditions evolve over the period.
5. Focus on operating margin
Berkeley will target operating
margin within its historic range of
17.5% to 19.5%, assuming stable
conditions. This requires both
the maintenance of development
margins and further real
reductions in operating costs.
6.Shareholder returns strategy
Berkeley has now delivered
£372 million of the £2.0 billion
shareholder returns under
Berkeley 2035 since 1 December
2024. This included £260 million
up to 30 September 2025 and
£112 million to 30 April 2026.
The next target is a further
£528 million by 30 September
2030 which we are currently
comfortably on target tomeet.
In these market conditions where
the share price is below NAVPS
which is £39.17 at year end, we
believe that share buy-backs
are the best way to maximise
shareholder value.
Berkeley 2035 Strategy update
Against the regulatory backdrop and subdued
transaction levels of the last three years, the
Group has progressively taken action to protect
the business and strengthen its balance sheet,
maintaining a strong cash balance, lowering land
creditors from £900 million to £486 million and
reducing operating costs from £178 million to £150
million, a 25% reduction in real terms. During this
time, we have limited new land investment, buying
just three sites, funded by non-core disposals.
As a result of escalating geopolitical tensions,
we announced decisive action on 1 April 2026 to
rephase delivery of Berkeley 2035 over the next
fouryears through the following strategic measures:
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
21 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Berkeley 2035 capital allocation
Minimum target 10-year shareholder return
As at 30 April 2026
Target
Return
£’m
Returned
To Date
£’m
Share
Buy-backs
Dividends
Paid
£’m
Amount
Remaining
£’m
FY25
£’m
FY26
£’m
Due by 30 Sept 2025 260 260 106 121 33 –
Due by 30 Sept 2030 640 112 – 112 – 528
Due by 30 Sept 2034 1,100 – – – – 1,100
Total 2,000 372 106 233 33 1,628
White City Living
Shareholder returns during the financial year totalled £233 million:
Shareholder returns for the year ended 30 April
2026
£’m
2025
£’m
Dividends paid – 68.0
Special dividend paid – 183.8
Share buy-backs undertaken 233.0 129.7
Shareholder return in the financial year 233.0 381.5
Of the £233 million returned in
the year, £121 million completes
the first £260 million of the
£2.0billion minimum shareholder
returns target under the Berkeley
2035 strategy, launched in
December 2024.
The next shareholder returns
target is £640 million by
30September 2030, of which
£112million was completed by
30April 2026. The remaining
£528 million will be made through
a combination of share buy-backs
and dividends.
These will be phased over
the intervening period in line
with Berkeley’s flexible capital
allocation model.
Shareholder Returns
22 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Sales
Trading levels for the first four
months of the year were stable and
consistent with the prior year but,
as we noted at our interim results,
the uncertainty over property
taxation in the three-month lead-in
to the November Budget adversely
affected transactions over this
period. The new year then began
with a degree of optimism, in
widespread anticipation of interest
rate cuts and gradual economic
recovery. However, the wider
ramifications of the Middle East
conflict brought the fragility of
the nascent recovery into context
and the market has returned to
being characterised by caution
andlacking in urgency.
Against this backdrop, forward
sales have reduced to £1,006
million (31 October 2025: £1,137
million and 30 April 2025: £1,403
million) as the value of sales
reservations secured in the year
was around 15% below the run-rate
of the previous two years, with
Berkeley maintaining a disciplined
approach to pricing and achieving
values slightly ahead of business
plan assumptions.
Importantly, customer interest has
remained good throughout, as
evidenced by the level of enquiries
and leads, and supply remains
woefully constrained with new
starts around 10% of the MHCLG
target. This bodes well for the time
when greater confidence returns
to the market.
At present, we are seeing
good transaction levels from
customers with a current need or
strong liquidity buying close to
completion, matching transactions
where necessary, with the level of
off-plan sales more impacted by
the lack of urgency in the market.
Our new Build to Rent platform,
Berkeley Living, has performed
well to date, letting over 120
homes and taking its first
occupations at Foundry Yard,
Alexandra Gate in April.
Chief Executive’s Review continued
Housing Market and Operations
Both letting velocity and rental
levels have been strong, further
demonstrating the underlying
demand for good quality homes
in London.
Looking to the future, while
near-term sentiment remains
cautious, the long-term outlook
is more positive, particularly in
London, where undersupply is
compounding. There is good
mortgage availability and we
have been through a period of
strong wage growth, with little
property inflation. This is good for
affordability, which will improve
further once interest rates fall
again, making this a good time for
customers with the ability to buy,
to do so, and take advantage of
the prevailing market dynamic.
London remains one of the
world’s most popular places to
live, work, and invest. The city’s
global status and appeal reflect
its dynamism and culture, trusted
legal framework, world-class
infrastructure, deep talent pools,
tolerant society and leading
commercial, education, and
knowledge clusters. It remains
the biggest financial centre in
Europe and second biggest in
the world. As confidence returns,
these fundamental strengths will
reassert themselves and Berkeley
is uniquely positioned to support
the city’s future success.
Construction
Berkeley has continued to
experience highly competitive
tendering across most trades
during the period, as our supply
chain looks to secure near-term
work in an environment where
housing and wider construction
activity remains subdued,
particularly in London. While the
ongoing conflict in the Middle
East has introduced inflationary
pressures on certain inputs, these
have been largely mitigated
through Berkeley’s strategy of
forward procuring key packages
on a fixed price basis.
Together with softer labour
market conditions, this has
helped to limit cost increases,
with build costs remaining
relatively stable over the year.
We expect inflationary pressures,
particularly those driven by higher
energy costs, to emerge within the
supply chain towards the second
half of 2026 and into 2027. A lack
of new project starts and delays
to live projects continues to place
financial strain on the supply
chain, and Berkeley is working
closely with its trusted partners to
maintain delivery capability.
Self-Remediation Terms
andContract
On 13 March 2023 Berkeley
entered into the Self-Remediation
Terms and Contract with MHCLG,
under which developers have
responsibility for any life-critical
fire safety defects in buildings they
have developed in the 30-year
period to April 2022.
For the 825 relevant buildings
Berkeley has developed over
this period, we have third party
assessments on 99%. All of the
remaining buildings are where
Berkeley is not the freeholder
and we expect to complete
these assessments over the
next three months. There are 39
buildings where works are still
to be completed, seven of which
are buildings where Berkeley
is reimbursing Government for
the works under the Developer
Remediation Contract. Where
works are required and yet to
commence, Berkeley intends to
begin works as soon as reasonably
possible, subject to access being
provided by the freeholder. It is
Berkeley’s preference to take full
responsibility for all its relevant
buildings and to complete an
required works itself as this will
speed up the overall process
of remediation. We are seeking
recoveries from the supply chain
and insurers where appropriate.
Lombard Square, Plumstead
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
23 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Our Vision responsible
businessstrategy
We continue to take action on our
ambitious long-term responsible
business strategy, Our Vision, helping
to drive our performance, spur innovation
and deliver a lasting positive impact
for society and the natural world.
Richard Stearn | Chief Executive
For more detail see
pages 36 and 38 to 56
24 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
We continue to work closely
with Government and the
BSR to complete any required
remediation work as quickly as
possible which, together with
the actions taken to date, should
restore trust and confidence to
the housing market, enabling it to
operate efficiently, effectively and
fairly for all.
Land and planning
At 30 April 2026 Berkeley’s land
holdings comprised 52,763 plots
across 59 developments (30
April 2025: 52,714 plots across
64 developments), including
those in the St Edward joint
venture. The plots in the land
holdings have an estimated future
gross profit of £6.4 billion (30
April 2025: £6.7 billion), which
includes Berkeley’s 50% share
of the anticipated profit from
StEdwarddevelopments.
Through replanning activity,
Berkeley has replaced £0.3 billion
of the £0.6 billion gross profit
recorded through the Income
Statement in the year. The
estimated future gross margin
in the land holdings at the end
of the year was 24.4% (30 April
2025: 24.7%).
As at 30 April 2026 Change 30 April 2025
Owned 52,763 49 52,714
Contracted – – –
Plots 52,763 49 52,714
Sales value £26.4bn -£0.8bn £27.2bn
Average selling price* £502k -£20k £522k
Average plot price* £42k -£6k £48k
Land cost % 8.4% -0.8% 9.2%
Gross margin £6,442m -£280m £6,722m
Gross margin % 24.4% -0.3% 24.7%
* Reflects joint venture sites at 100%
Chief Executive’s Review continued
During the year, Berkeley secured
new masterplan consents at
The Green Quarter in Ealing and
Woodberry Down in Hackney.
New planning consents were
secured at Borough Triangle (890
homes), Hemel Hempstead (485
homes) and, following an appeal,
Brighton Gasworks (480 homes).
In addition, more than 40 planning
amendments were agreed to
existing consents for additional
homes, including at Bow Green,
White City Living, TwelveTrees
Park in West Ham, London Dock in
Wapping, Heron Wharf in Poplar,
Lillibrooke in Maidenhead and the
Horlicks Quarter in Slough. We
were also delighted to receive a
positive outcome for our appeal
atCamden Goods Yard after the
year end.
Despite these significant
steps, decision-making within
the planning and regulatory
system remains uncertain, as
demonstrated by the Planning
Inspectorate blocking Berkeley’s
policy-compliant plans for over
850 homes on a designated
regeneration site in Peckham town
centre. Our plans to regenerate
both Beckton Gasworks and
Motspur Park Gasworks have also
been blocked at local level, and we
welcome the GLA’s swift action to
call-in these applications.
The estimated future gross
margin represents management’s
risk-adjusted assessment of the
potential gross profit for each site,
taking account of a wide range
of factors: current sales and input
prices, political and economic
conditions, the planning and
regulatory frameworks, and other
market forces – all of which could
have a significant effect on the
eventual outcome.
The pipeline (not included in the
land holdings) now comprises
approximately 11,000 plots
(30 April 2025: 12,000 plots),
following the conditional
acquisition of a 145-acre site
in Bromley, and the transfer of
Hemel Hempstead into the land
holdings. The pipeline includes
the first phase of the site at
Beckton (2,800 homes), which
received a recommendation for
approval at Committee during
the year but is subject to a
call-in by the GLA as we were
unable toagree a commercially
acceptable review mechanism
with the localauthority through
the Section 106 agreement.
Housing Market and Operations continued
Grand Union, Brent
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
25 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
26 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Chief Executive’s Review continued
Build to Rent (BTR) Platform
Berkeley has continued to advance its BTR strategy, with the first six
buildings now transferred to the BTR platform, which includes two
transfers during the year at Grand Union and Silkstream, bringing the
platform to 1,122 homes currently completed and in production:
The platform brand –
Berkeley Living – has been
established to bring Berkeley’s
reputation for build quality,
placemaking expertise and
exceptional customer service to
undersupplied rental markets.
During the year, Berkeley Living’s
first homes were launched at
Alexandra Gate and Kidbrooke
Village, with a third launched after
the year-end at Silkstream. Three
further launches are planned this
year at Horlicks Quarter, Eden
Grove and Grand Union.
During the year, 11 additional
planning consents have been
obtained to revise the amenity
provision or optimise the unit mix
and layouts for the rental market.
The initial BTR portfolio homes are
included in the land holdings plots
and future estimated gross profit.
Sites in the BTR platform (30 April 2026) Location
Initial BTR
Homes
Total BTR
Homes
– Alexandra Gate, Haringey Zone 3 187 419
– Kidbrooke Village, Greenwich Zone 3 90 206
– Eden Grove, Staines Surrey 158 158
– Horlicks Quarter, Slough Berkshire 327 327
– Grand Union, Brent Zone 3 177 351
– Silkstream, Barnet Zone 3 183 183
Allocated to the BTR platform –
completed and in production
1,122
– BTR future production 2,878
– Other sites – 2,356
Initial BTR portfolio 4,000 4,000
Kidbrooke Village, Greenwich
Oakhill, Hildenborough
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
27 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Berkeley is determined to play
a full part in delivering the
Government’s housing and growth
mission, as demonstrated by our
continued focus on long-term
urban regeneration. We strongly
support the Government’s
planning policy reforms and
encourage rapid, decisive
implementation to ensure these
measures translate into more
positive decision-making inside
the system.
With the macro backdrop
deteriorating, there is now a
clearcase for further Government
action beyond the initiatives
announced to date. We are
encouraged that ministers and
officials are actively engaged
and recognise the remaining
investment barriers and
disincentives within the tax,
planning and wider regulatory
system. We are confident that
delivery will respond quickly as
they are addressed.
The underlying fundamentals
of London and the South-East’s
undersupplied housing market
remain compelling across both for
sale and rental tenures. London
is a true global city, one of the
world’s leading financial centres,
with exceptional strengths as a
place to live, work and invest.
While short-term buyer caution
has been driven by uncertainty
over the timing of interest
rate reductions, underlying
demand indicators remain
positive, and transactions will
recover as conditions and
confidenceimprove.
Berkeley is in a strong financial
and operational position, with a
clear long-term plan to create
value for shareholders and wider
stakeholders across the cycle.
We are operating in a highly
complex and rapidly changing
environment and will always run
the business for the long term,
prioritising financial strength.
While the current level of elevated
geopolitical and macro-economic
uncertainty persists, we will
continue to be agile, matching
production to demand, being
efficient in our operations,
enhancing our land holdings and
investing in Berkeley Living, with
the focus on cash generation,
over short-term profit targets, to
facilitate returns to shareholders.
The precise balance is very hard
to call in this environment but
operating with this agility will
maximise shareholder value over
the long term.
Outlook
28 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Figure 2 – Regional housing supply
–
100,000
90,000
80,000
70,000
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
East of
England
East
Midlands
London North
East
North
West
South
East
South
West
West
Midlands
Yorkshire
and the
Humber
Homes
2023/24
2024/25
2025/26 (EPC data)
Assessed Housing Need
Berkeley’s core markets
200,000 40,000
100,000 20,000
75,000 15,000
125,000 25,000
50,000 10,000
25,000 5,000
150,000 30,000
175,000 35,000
225,000 45,000
250,000 50,000
275,000 55,000
300,000 60,000
-58%
-86%
2007 Q4
2011 Q4
2018 Q4
2015 Q4
2022 Q4
2009 Q4
2013 Q4
2020 Q4
2008 Q4
2012 Q4
2019 Q4
2016 Q4
2023 Q4
2024 Q4
2025 Q4
2010 Q4
2017 Q4
2014 Q4
2021 Q4
England Starts England TargetLondon Starts London Plan Target
Pandemic
&
recovery
Figure 1 – Construction starts activity
Figure 3 – Transaction volumes
London Starts (rolling 12 months)
England Starts (rolling 12 months)
Market overview
1,500,000
1,250,000
1,000,000
750,000
500,000
250,000
–
–
200,000
100,000
50,000
150,000
250,000
2006 Q4
2007 Q4
2008 Q4
2009 Q4
2010 Q4
2011 Q4
2012 Q4
2013 Q4
2014 Q4
2015 Q4
2016 Q4
2017 Q4
2018 Q4
2019 Q4
2020 Q4
2021 Q4
2022 Q4
2023 Q4
2024 Q4
2025 Q4
Mini Budget3% SDLT
levy imposed
England (excl. London)
London
England Transactions (rolling 12 months)
London Transactions (rolling 12 months)
Pandemic
&
recovery
The housing market is
sensitive to underlying
sentiment and
prevailing geopolitical
and macroeconomic
conditions. It is
inherently cyclical in
nature, and Berkeley’s
strategy is designed
to operate in this
environment, with a
long-term business
model that enables us
to deliver homes and
positive outcomes for
all stakeholders across
the cycle.
The global economy
continues to face
heightened volatility, with
the conflict in the Middle
East an additional and
ongoing source of instability.
The UK also faces its own
domestic challenges with a
strained fiscal and political
environment contributing to
a complex and challenging
operating environment for
the housebuilding sector.
Inflation was 2.8% in the year
to April 2026, materially
lower than the 3.5% of a
year earlier, and dramatically
lower than the double-digit
levels seen in 2022. The
conflict in the Middle East
has paused expected falls in
inflation, meaning interest
rates are likely to remain
somewhat higher than
previously expected. Despite
these concerns inflation is
still expected to continue
falling towards the Bank of
England’s 2% target, and
further interest rate cuts
areexpected.
1
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
29 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
The Green Quarter, Ealing
The sector is often considered
a bellwether for the health of
the wider economy, and the
Government has rightly included
it as a central part of its mission
for growth. It is encouraging that
the Government has focused on
reforming the planning system,
particularly with respect to
London’s supply side challenges
that need to be overcome to solve
the historical structural undersupply
of housing in the capital.
The Government has pledged
to deliver 1.5 million homes in
England over this Parliament. At
300,000 homes a year, this is a
level consistent with the previous
Government target, but one which
requires a significant increase in
housing starts from where they
stand today.
The National Planning Policy
Framework (NPPF) was revised
at the end of 2024 to, among
other things, reintroduce housing
targets and release more land
for new homes. A further reform
of the NPPF is currently ongoing
including the implementation
of National Decision Making
Policies (NDMPs) and a number
of further amendments to the
planning system that it is hoped
will increase supply.
Following on from these national
reforms the Homes for London
package of funding and planning
reform focused on London and
announced in partnership between
the Government and the GLA was
an extremely welcomed recognition
of the particular challenges of
London, and its importance to
solving the national housing crisis,
and driving economic growth.
This package is the first to face
into London’s central challenge of
project viability, and the need to
prioritise the competing asks made
of urban regeneration to ensure
projects go ahead.
To be successful, these reforms
now require pragmatic and
flexible implementation to give
homebuilders the certainty to
invest and bring forward the many
currently stalled regeneration
projects at the pace needed to
address the decline in London’s
new housing starts.
Whilst this much needed focus on
planning is welcomed, the impact
of these initiatives will not be
immediate. Other challenges of the
operating environment are wide
reaching, including the impact
of build cost inflation and supply
chain strength, affordability and a
reduced demand from affordable
housing providers due to their
funding constraints.
A rational review of property
taxation is essential in restarting the
market. This includes allowing the
full expensing of capital investment
needed to get urban regeneration
projects off the ground, as well as
supporting investors who purchase
newly built homes by excluding
them from the 5% SDLT surcharge.
The sector has absorbed a rapidly
changing regulatory environment,
including the Building Safety
Act 2022, the Building Safety
Regulator, the Future Homes
Standard, the Environment Act
2021, biodiversity net gain and
significant changes to building
regulations Part B, Part F,
Part L, Part O and Part S. The
introduction of the Residential
Property Developer Tax and the
expected introduction of the
Building Safety Levy place further
pressure on development viability.
Affordability constraints and
evolving customer preferences
continue to drive strong demand in
the rental sector, sustaining rental
growth. With the rental market
accounting for a fifth of households
in England, the BTR sector is an
increasingly important part of the
market and the Renters Rights
Act 2025 has increased the trend
towards the professionalisation of
the rental sector. 2025 saw record
levels of capital being deployed in
the sector.
2
Whilst Berkeley supports positive
changes, the increasingly
challenging operating
environment has resulted in
subdued construction activity
nationally, which is impeding
much needed supply.
The long-term fundamentals of
Berkeley’s core housing markets
of London and the South East
remain strong:
— London’s position as a global
city, leading in many industries,
education, entertainment, and
the arts remains a compelling
offering;
— Systemic undersupply in
London and the South East
looks likely to become more
acute over coming years due to
falls in housing starts;
— Unemployment remains at low
levels,
3
with strong wage growth;
— Interest rates are still expected
to fall from the recent peak,
improving affordability and
sentiment;
— A competitive lender market
ensures interest rates feed
through to good mortgage
availability; and
— Strong growth in the rental
market means potential
investors can achieve
appropriate yields, supporting
new build rental demand.
30 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Market overview continued
London and the South East are
systemically undersupplied
Meeting the Government’s 1.5
million home target requires
average completions of 300,000
per year across this Parliament.
During 2025/26, the number of
new homes completed across
England was around 205,000,
4
the lowest level since 2015/16.
5
Given the path of housing starts
and planning permissions, future
completions are likely to remain
materially below target, further
compounding the supply issue.
There were 125,000 starts reported
in England in 2025, which is lower
than the pandemic impacted
period (see Figure 1).
6
Planning permissions also
continued to decline in 2025,
extending a multi-year downward
trend, and are now at their lowest
level since 2013.
2
London’s housing need is now
assessed as 88,000 homes per
year,
7
however, the current London
Plan (which remains in place) has
an annual housing delivery target
of 52,000 homes which if reached
would still represent a shortfall
of 36,000 homes or around 41%
every year relative to the NPPF’s
assessment of need. In 2024/25,
there were 33,000 homes delivered
in London, of which 28,000 were
new build.
5
The delivery in 2025/26
is expected to be broadly similar,
4
a 63% shortfall compared to the
latest identified need.
This supply constraint in London
looks set to tighten further in the
medium to long term, as new
construction starts have fallen to
record lows of just 7,500 in the
last year despite an uptick in Q1
2026 (see Figure 1). This low level
of activity is consistent across both
the private and affordable sectors.
8
The situation in the South East
is similar. The latest housing
need assessment for the region
increased to nearly 71,000 (from
51,000) homes per year,
7
compared
to average completions of 38,000
per year over the last three years.
4, 5
This is an annual shortfall of 33,000
homes (46%), the second highest
regional shortfall behind London.
A lack of building in London, will
also tend to increase the need for
homes in the wider South East.
Transaction volumes
Transaction volumes over the last
year have settled at levels prior to
the pandemic. This current level
of activity is less than half the
peak activity in 2006, prior to the
financial crisis (see Figure 3).
9
The reaction to temporary
SDLT cuts in recent periods
demonstrated the positive impact
a more permanent rationalisation
of the SDLT regime could have
on housing market activity.
Conversely, the introduction of
the 3% SDLT levy on additional
properties in 2016 and its increase
to 5% in 2024 showed the adverse
impact of increased transaction
taxes on overall activity. In the
context of a highly taxed sector
this likely means the Treasury is
raising less revenue not more.
The tendency of investors
to purchase earlier in the
development cycle means they are
a particularly importantelement
in de-risking future cash flows and
driving overall housing supply.
Such investment (including
some overseas purchasers, who
have also been impacted by the
introduction of a further 2% SDLT
surcharge) is a crucial element of
new housing supply. They typically
invest early in the development
cycle, which allows developers
and their funders to bring forward
larger and more capital-intensive
developments, thus creating
significant additionality beyond
their directpurchases.
Setting conditions for growth
Berkeley strongly supports the
Government’s ambition to increase
housing delivery as a key part of
its mission to increase economic
growth. Delivering new homes is
key not only to solving the housing
crisis, but driving up productivity
and wider economic growth as well
by improving labour mobility and
the affordability of housing.
Despite some initial success
in reforms to the planning and
regulatory system and in the setting
of clear objectives for the delivery
of more good green homes in the
places where they are most needed,
the pace of reform has slowed and
the Government needs to redouble
its efforts if it is to set the right
conditions for growth in the sector.
To grow the sector needs a
predictable and supportive planning
environment, it needs developers
to have the confidence to invest
in new sites and new phases or
sites, and it needs customers who
want to live, work or invest in the
completed homes. To achieve this
theGovernment must:
— Implement the Homes for London
package in a pragmatic and flexible
manner aimed at delivering the
spirit of the reforms and securing as
many new homes as possible;
— Directly support investment by
allowing the full expensing of
the investment needed to get
brownfield urban regeneration
projects up and running. This would
bring the sector in line with other
forms of capital investment;
— Support investors that help deliver
new homes by removing the 5%
additional home SDLT surcharges
if, and only if, an investor finances a
new build home;
— Support home ownership by
fixing regulatory problems with
the Freedom to Buy mortgage
guarantee scheme that limit its
uptake;
— Make the overall tax burden on
urban regeneration manageable, by
replacing CIL with negotiated S106
agreements, scrapping the Building
Safety Levy, and adding a sunset
clause to the RPDT when it has
raised the money required; and
— Solve the operational issues of the
Building Safety Regulator so it can
support the safe delivery of taller
buildings at scale.
Sources:
(1) Bank of England; (2) Savills; (3) Office for
National Statistics; (4) MHCLG EPC data; (5)
MHCLG Live Table 118; (6) MHCLG Live Table
213; (7) House of Commons Library Debate
Pack, May 2025; (8) MHCLG Live Table 217;
(9) Land Registry
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
31 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Revenue of £2,383.3 million
in the year (2025: £2,486.5
million) included £2,265.2 million
of residential revenue (2025:
£2,432.2 million), £110.4 million of
commercial revenue (2025: £14.8
million) and £7.7 million of land
sales (2025: £39.5 million).
4,076 new homes (2025: 4,047)
were completed across London
and the South-East at an average
selling price of £546,000 (2025:
£593,000) reflecting the mix of
properties completed in the year.
The gross margin percentage is
25.1% (2025: 26.6%), reflecting
the mix of developments on
which homes were completed in
theyear.
With overheads of £150.4 million,
£9.9 million lower than the prior
year (2025: £160.3 million),
the operating margin is 18.7%
(2025:20.1%).
The cost of borrowings and
amortisation of associated fees
and imputed interest on land
creditors is outweighed by
interest earned from gross cash
holdings, resulting in net finance
income of £1.6 million for the year
(2025: £14.2 million).
Berkeley’s share of the results
of joint ventures is a profit of
£3.0 million (2025: £14.7 million),
with St Edward’s profits arising
largely from its developments
outsideLondon.
The taxation charge for the year
is £133.1 million (2025: £146.9
million) at an effective tax rate
of 29.5% (2025: 27.8%), which
incorporates the additional 4%
RPDT and Corporation Tax of 25%.
Pre-tax return on equity for the
year is 12.5% (2025: 14.9%) and
return on capital employed for
theyear is 13.8% (2025: 16.5%).
Basic earnings per share has
decreased by 10.8% from 371.8
pence to 331.6 pence, which takes
account of the 6.3 million share
buy-backs for £233.0 million.
Trading performance
Year ended 30 April
2026
£m
2025
£m
Change
£m %
Revenue 2,383.3 2,486.5 -103.2 -4.2%
Gross profit 597.2 660.3 -63.1 -9.6%
Operating expenses (150.4) (160.3) +9.9 -6.2%
Operating profit 446.8 500.0 -53.2 -10.6%
Net finance income 1.6 14.2 -12.6
Share of joint ventures 3.0 14.7 -11.7
Profit before tax 451.4 528.9 -77.5 -14.7%
Pre-tax return on equity 12.5% 14.9% -2.4%
Earnings per share – basic 331.6p 371.8p -40.2p -10.8%
Taxation
The Group has an overall
tax charge of £133.1 million
for the year (2025: £146.9
million) and an effective tax
rate of 29.5% (2025: 27.8%).
The Group manages its
tax affairs in an open and
transparent manner with the
tax authorities and observes
all applicable rules and
regulations in the countries
in which it operates. Factors
that may affect the Group’s
tax charge include changes in
tax legislation and the closure
of open tax matters in the
ordinary course of events.
Total tax paid
(year ended 30 April 2026)
Corporate Tax £105.5m
SDLT £5.5m
PAYE £64.6m
Employees’ NI £8.6m
Employer’s NI £31.0m
For the year ended 30 April 2026, the total
tax contribution to the UK Treasury was
£215.2 million; split between taxes borne
by Berkeley of £142.0 million (corporation
tax, employer’s NIC and SDLT) and taxes
borne by our employees of £73.2 million
(PAYE and employees’ NIC). This total
tax contribution does not include the
indirect tax contribution paid by Berkeley’s
suppliers and customers. The wider indirect
tax impact is set out on page 10.
Trading and Financial Review
£215.2m
32 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Regent’s View, Bethnal Green
Trading and Financial Review continued
Financial position
The Group’s net assets are
£3,640.2 million (2025:
£3,559.8million).
Investment properties
Investment properties of
£297.2million increased by £151.5
million in the year (30 April 2025:
£145.7 million), measured on a
cost basis, reflecting the transfer
of two assets from inventory
(£82.4 million) to the Group’s BTR
platform and construction related
investment across the six assets
in the platform. As at 30 April
2026 two of the properties under
construction completed while the
remaining four continue to be
under development.
Inventories
Inventories of £4,743.3 million
include £563.1 million of land not
under development (30 April
2025: £554.3 million), £3,848.5
million of work in progress (30
April 2025: £4,160.1 million) and
£331.7 million of completed stock
(30 April 2025: £337.8 million).
During the year, three
developments (One Waterside,
Bath, Reading Riverworks and
Hertford Locks) have been moved
from land not under development
into work in progress. The
completed stock is spread across
29 developments (30 April 2025:
25 developments).
Creditors
Total creditors of £2,182.7 million
include £639.1 million of on-
account contract receipts from
customers (30 April 2025: £711.5
million) and land creditors of
£485.8 million (30 April 2025:
£714.0 million). Of the total £485.8
million land creditor balance, £113.6
million is classified as short term.
Creditors include provisions of
£226.3 million (30 April 2025:
£229.6 million) which represent
post completion development
obligations, including those related
to building fire-safety matters, and
other provisions.
Summarised Balance Sheet
as at 30 April
2026
£m
2025
£m
Change
£m
Non-current assets (excluding
investment properties)
297. 3 379.3 -82.0
Investment properties 297. 2 145.7 +151.5
Inventories 4,743.3 5,052.2 -308.9
Debtors 121.8 100.4 +21.4
Creditors (2,182.7) (2,455.1) +272.4
Capital employed 3,276.9 3,222.5 +54.4
Net cash 363.3 337.3 +26.0
Net assets 3,640.2 3,559.8 +80.4
Shares, net of treasury and EBT 92.9m 99.0m -6.1m
Net asset value per share 3,917p 3,595p +322p
Abridged Cash Flow for year ended 30 April
2026
£m
2025
£m
Profit before taxation 451.4 528.9
Taxation paid (98.5) (120.5)
Net investment in working capital (164.2) (215.5)
Net receipts from/(investment in) joint
ventures
40.3 (15.8)
Other movements 30.0 9.7
Shareholder returns (233.0) (381.5)
Increase/(decrease) in net cash 26.0 (194.7)
Opening net cash 337.3 532.0
Closing net cash 363.3 337.3
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
33 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Net cash
The Group ended the year with
net cash of £363.3 million (2025:
£337.3 million), an increase of
£26.0 million.
The net cash comprises gross
cash deposits of £1,023.3 million
and long-term borrowings
of £660.0 million. Long-term
borrowings have decreased by
£17.9 million in the year following
the repayment of the Homes
England borrowing facility (see
Funding below).
Net assets and NAVPS
Net assets increased over
the year by £80.4 million to
£3,640.2 million (30 April 2025:
£3,559.8 million) as shareholder
returns of £233.0 million and
other movements in reserves
of £4.9 million partly offset the
profit after tax for the year of
£318.3million.
The shares in issue, net of treasury
and EBT shares, closed at 92.9
million compared to 99.0 million
at the start of the year. The net
reduction of 6.1 million shares
comprises two movements:
— The 6.3 million of share buy-
backs undertaken during the
year for £233.0 million (£37.10
per share); and
— The issue of 0.2 million shares
under the 2011 LTIP.
Consequently, the net asset value
per share is 3,917 pence at 30
April 2026, up 9.0% from 3,595
pence at the start of the year.
Funding
The Group’s borrowing capacity
of £1,200 million was unchanged
during the year and comprises:
— £400 million unsecured 10-year
Green Bonds which mature in
August 2031 at a fixed coupon
of 2.5% per annum; and
— £800 million bank facility,
including a £260 million
Green Term Loan and a
£540 million undrawn
Revolving Credit Facility.
Berkeley has allocated the
proceeds of the Green Bonds
and Green Term Loan to its
ongoing development activities
in accordance with its Green
Financing Framework (available
on its website).
With borrowings of £660 million,
the Group’s gross cash holdings
of over £1.0 billion throughout the
year have been placed on deposit
with its six relationship banks.
After the year end, the Group
extended the banking facility to
£1.0 billion, comprising a £240
million Term Loan, which is fully
drawn bearing interest at a rate
linked to SONIA, and a £760
million Revolving Credit Facility
(RCF) which remains undrawn.
These banking facilities are in
place to June 2031 with two one-
year extensions taking the facility
to June 2033.
Joint ventures
Included within non-current
assets are investments in joint
ventures accounted for using
the equity method which are at
£203.1 million at 30 April 2026
(2025: £243.4 million). The net
£40.3 million decrease in the year
arises from Berkeley’s 50% share
of three movements:
— Share of profits earned in joint
ventures of £3.0 million;
— Dividend distribution from St
Edward of £45.1 million; and
— Share of loan contributions to
site specific joint ventures of
£1.8 million.
In St Edward, 127 homes
were completed in the year
at an average selling price of
£843,000 (2025: 282 homes at
£499,000). Completions occurred
predominately at its South East
developments, Hartland Village
in Fleet, Green Park Village
in Reading and Highcroft in
Wallingford, alongside the final
three penthouses in the Millbank
development.
During the year, one development
(Arch & Bloom, Guildford) moved
from land not under development
into work in progress.
In total, 2,004 plots (2025: 2,429
plots) in the land holdings relate
to four St Edward developments,
all outside of London (Reading,
Fleet, Wallingford and Guildford).
The Strategic Report on pages
02to 93 was approved by the
Board and signed on its behalf by:
Richard Stearn
Chief Executive
23 June 2026
34 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
Our KPIs are aligned to the business strategy and
are used to actively monitor business performance.
Financial KPIs
Profit before tax
(£m)
557.3
604.0
551.5
This is our core measure of profitability,
our absolute return from the sale and
delivery of new homes in the year.
Definition: Profit earned by the Group
during the year, including any finance
income and costs and share of results
of joint ventures, but before any
taxexpense.
Link to Our Vision:
528.9
451.4
Net cash
(£m)
410.4
268.9
This provides a measure of the financial
strength of the Group.
The £0.4 billion of net cash at 30 April
2026 combined with £1.2 billion of
borrowing capacity provides the Group
with total liquidity of £1.6 billion.
After year end, the Group extended the
borrowing capacity to £1.4 billion. See
Note 2.27 on page 218.
Definition: Cash and cash equivalents,
less total borrowings. See page 213.
Link to Our Vision:
337.3
363.3
532.0
Pre-tax return on equity
(%)
18.7
17.5
This is the efficiency of the returns
generated from shareholder equity
inthebusiness.
Read more on remuneration on
page132.
Definition: This is measured by
calculating profit before tax as a
percentage of the average of opening
and closing shareholders’ funds.
See pages 217 and 218.
Link to Our Vision:
14.9
12.5
16.2
Future gross margin
in land holdings
(£m)
7,629
8,258
This provides a measure of expected
value in the Group’s land holdings,
including its share of joint ventures, in
the event that it successfully sells and
delivers the developments planned for.
Definition: This represents
management’s risk-adjusted
assessment of the potential gross profit
for each of the Group’s sites, including
the proportionate share of its joint
ventures, taking account of a wide
range of factors, including: current
sales and input prices; the economic
and political backdrop; the planning
regime; and other market factors; all
ofwhich could have a significant effect
on the eventual outcome.
Link to Our Vision:
6,929
6,722
6,442
Net asset value per share
(£)
33.63
31.01
28.18
This Balance Sheet measure reflects the
value of shareholders’ interests in the
net assets of the business.
Definition: Net assets attributable to
shareholders divided by the number
of shares in issue, excluding shares
held in treasury and shares held
by the Employee Benefit Trust.
See page 217.
Link to Our Vision:
35.95
39.17
Cash due on forward sales
(£m)
1,403
1,006
1,701
This measures cash due from
customers under unconditional
contracts and reflects the strength and
financial stability of the business from
secured future sales.
Definition: This measures cash still due
from customers at the relevant Balance
Sheet date under unconditional
contracts for sale. It excludes forward
sales of affordable housing, commercial
properties and institutional sales, and
forward sales within the Group’s joint
ventures. Seepage218.
Link to Our Vision:
2,136
2,171
2022
2022
2022
2022
2022
2022
2023
2023
2023
2023
2023
2023
2024
2024
2024
2024
2024
2024
2025
2025
2025
2025
2025
2025
2026
2026
2026
2026
2026
2026
HOMES &
CUSTOMERS
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
35 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Non-Financial KPIs
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
Net Promoter Score (NPS)
(Rate)
Our six-month rolling NPS is an indicator
of the success of our efforts to provide
world-class customer service. Our
NPS significantly exceeds the sector
average of +61.4 (In-house Research,
December 2025) and compares
favourably with top-performing
consumer brands.
Definition: Customers register a
score between 0–10 of how likely
they are to recommend us to a friend;
9–10 being classified as promoters,
7–8 being passive, and 0–6 being
detractors. TheNPS is the percentage
of promoters less the percentage of
detractors, on a scale of -100 to +100.
Link to Our Vision:
81.6
77.9
80.2
79.2
77.2
Annual Injury Incidence
Rate (AIIR)
(Rate per 100,000 people)
This measure shows the number of
reportable injuries during the year,
in relation to the number of Berkeley
employees and on-site contractors.
Our AIIR significantly outperforms the
construction industry average of 280
(Health and Safety Executive (HSE),
November2025).
Definition: This rate is calculated by
taking the number of reportable injuries
across our operations throughout the
year, multiplied by 100,000, divided by
the average number of people working
across our sites, offices and sales suites
in the year.
Link to Our Vision:
52
79
72
102
100
Direct apprentices and
training
(%)
8.9
This measure shows the proportion of
our employees who are an apprentice,
graduate or sponsored student.
On average, we had more than 90
apprentices, 55 graduates and 60
sponsored students during the course
ofthe year.
Definition: Calculated as the average
monthly percentage of our direct
workforce who are apprentices,
graduates or sponsored students, in
line with the definition provided by
The5% Club.
Link to Our Vision:
8.7
8.5
9.5
10.0
Brownfield regeneration
(%)
86
This measure shows the proportion of
our homes delivered on brownfield
regeneration land during the year
(including joint ventures).
Definition: This is measured by
calculating the number of homes
delivered during the year on brownfield
regeneration land as a percentage of
total homes delivered during the year.
It includes joint ventureactivities.
Link to Our Vision:
92
90
87
86
Affordable housing subsidies
and wider contributions
(£m)
580
530
370
560
556
This measures our contribution to
affordable housing subsidies delivered
and wider community infrastructure
benefits committed during the year. The
value in any one year is influenced by
the number and mix of homes delivered.
Definition: This is the total financial
contribution of community and
infrastructure benefits committed to
under Section 106 agreements during
the year, together with the opportunity
cost of affordable homes delivered
in the year with reference to open
market value.
Link to Our Vision:
Greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions intensity
(tCO
2
e/100 sqm)
0.28
0.22
0.61
This measure relates to the GHG
emissions resulting from our direct
activities to the floor area completed
in the year. The figure is disclosed on
an operational reporting boundary,
as further explained in the Directors’
Report. See pages 158 to 159.
Definition: This is calculated by
dividing our absolute scopes 1 and
2 (market-based) emissions by the
residential and commercial floor area
legally completed in the year (including
joint ventures), plus the floor area of
homes completed for Berkeley Living.
Link to Our Vision:
0.30
0.27
Key | Our Vision priorities
2022 2022
2023 2023
2024 2024
2025 2025
2026 2026
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2022 2022
2023 2023
2024 2024
2025 2025
2026 2026
36 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Responsible business at a glance
Berkeley has an established approach to responsible business.
We define this as the holistic way we manage the business that
takes into account economic, socialand environmental value.
Kidbrooke Village
Our Vision is our
ambitious responsible
business strategy, which
drives change, sets
us apart and delivers
lasting positiveimpact.
An integrated strategy
for ESG
Our Vision provides a framework
for how we address Environmental,
Social and Governance (ESG)
issues. It includes topics such as
sustainability, health and safety,
and quality, and encompasses
our approach with a number of
stakeholders such as customers,
employees and the supplychain.
Our Vision sets out the strategic
priorities for the business. Each
of the priorities includes a long-
term goal and is supported by an
underlying action plan with targets
and a set of core KPIs which we use
to measure outcomes and impacts.
For 2026 we have evolved Our
Vision in the context of Berkeley
2035 and our current operating
environment; including the addition
of Berkeley Living to our portfolio.
Reporting on progress
This year we are reporting
progress against the 10 strategic
priorities and related targets of
OurVision2030.
We are also introducing the
revisedstructure of our responsible
business strategy, which we will
report against going forward.
This updated version is known
asOurVision.
Embedding it day-to-day
Our Vision is underpinned
by detailed policies, standards
and management systems in
areas such as technical design,
procurement, sustainability and
health and safety. These set a clear
framework for the teams within
each of our autonomous businesses
to follow. We use our network of
operational committees (see page
105) to embed Our Vision and to
drive progress in each priority area.
Tackling material issues
In 2026 we conducted a
comprehensive Double Materiality
Assessment to reassess the ESG
topics that matter most to the
business and its stakeholders, and
understand how relevant they are,
in the context of Our Vision. The
process followed best practice
and emerging regulations,
combining value chain analysis,
internal expertise, stakeholders’
views, and a structured scoring of
Impacts, Risks and Opportunities
(IROs). The assessment identified
a focused set of material topics
across the ESG agenda.
Strong governance
Our Vision is overseen by a team
at Group level and managed by a
network of subject matter experts
across the business.
Quarterly updates are prepared for
the Main Board together with an
annual presentation on progress.
Monthly Board meetings are held
with the CEO, CFO, COO, Group
Executive for Responsible Business
and Group Head of Sustainability.
Progress on ESG topics is taken into
account in ExecutiveRemuneration
(see page 132).
Read more about Our Vision
on pages 38 to 56
Scan the QR code to read about
our approach to responsible business
Our vision is to
lead the future of
urban regeneration
and home building.
Trusted to transform
the most complex
sites into exceptional
places thatdeliver
a lasting positive
impact for society
and the natural
world.
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
37 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
King’s Road Park, Fulham
WhatHouse? Awards 2025
Best Large
Housebuilder
HomeViews
No.1 Developer
for Build Quality
Building Awards 2025
Housebuilder
of the Year
RESI Awards 2026
Large Developer
of the Year
Awards
Read more about the
Berkeley Foundation on
pages 52 and 57
The Berkeley Foundation
We established the Berkeley Foundation
in 2011 as an independent charity
to support young people and their
communities to thrive and be a force
for change in the world. It is funded by
Berkeley and our employees volunteer
their time, expertise and money to support
the Foundation and its charity partners.
Engaging stakeholders
The nature of our business means
that we have a wide variety of
stakeholder groups, with a range
of interests from the activities of
individual developments through
tostrategic business performance.
We engage with stakeholders to
understand their opinions and
respond to their requirements.
Getting this engagement right
is fundamental to the success
of our business, with the interests
of our stakeholders embedded
into the long-term strategy of
the business.
Read more about our
stakeholders on pages 78
and110 to 117
Policies
We have policies in place
to govern our day-to-day
activities and the behaviour
of our employees, partners
and supply chain across key
topics such as business ethics,
employee matters, human rights,
sustainability, building safety
and quality assurance, and health,
safety andwellbeing.
ESG performance
pages 58 and 59
Climate-related disclosures
pages 60 to 76
Section 172(1) Statement
page 78
Performance
and disclosures
Non-financial and Sustainability
Information Statement page 79
38 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Progress against Our Vision 2030
Places that stand the test of time: What we create
Customers Quality Communities Climate action Nature
Achieve a Net
Promoter Score
of +70 or above
annually.
Achieve a
Recommend
to a Friend
score of 95% or
above annually.
Encourage 90% of
customers to sign
up to MyHome
Plus, our customer
information portal.
Transform our
digital offering to
enable customers
to interact with us
24/7 by 2026.
Adjust and embed
processes in
response to the
Building Safety
Act requirements.
Ensure
appropriate
competence of
our people and
supply chain for
building safety.
Further
enhance our
internal training
programme for
building safety
year-on-year.
Target 90% of
our homes to
be delivered on
brownfield land.
Embed a
Community
Plan on all
developments by
2026.
Generate social
value through each
development.
Work with
external experts
to assess people’s
quality of life on
developments.
Undertake
embodied carbon
assessments
and target
reductions for each
development.
Engage with
manufacturers of
the top five impact
materials by 2026.
Rebaseline and
achieve validation
on our science-
based targets and
net zero target.
Achieve a 15%
reduction in energy
consumption from
2023 to 2030.
Develop an
approach for
environmental
net gain.
Assess the
impact of nature
within our supply
chain in line with
the Taskforce
on Nature-
related Financial
Disclosures
(TNFD) and report
externally by 2028.
Reduce
construction
waste by 50%
from 2023
to 2030.
Progress against targets
Achieved In progress
Key | Progress
Employee
experience
Modernised
production
Future
skills
Supply
chain
Shared
value
Increase staff
engagement in
each survey.
Embed our
approach to
Equity, Diversity
and Inclusion
(EDI), focusing
on leadership,
awareness
and training.
Achieve an AIIR of
250 or below per
100,000 people,
targeting zero
harm.
Raise the
proportion
of women in
management
positions to
33% by 2026.
Further embed
our new digital
platform to
capture the
golden thread
of information
for every home.
Utilise Building
Information
Modelling (BIM)
for apartment
schemes over
18 metres.
Measure and
increase the
proportion of Pre
Manufactured
Value (PMV) within
our developments.
Ensure the
Berkeley
Competency
Framework is
being effectively
implemented.
Maintain
membership of
The 5% Club.
Host a range
of careers
events focused
on increasing
the diversity
of individuals
attracted to work
in the industry.
Support SMEs
by gifting
Apprenticeship
Levy.
Align our
processes with the
recommendations
of the Chartered
Institute of
Procurement and
Supply (CIPS).
Work with Code
for Construction
Product Information
(CCPI) to ensure
standards are
improved across
the supply chain
for product
information by
2026.
Assess all
contractors for
modern slavery risk.
Increase employee
engagement with
the Foundation
year-on-year.
Leverage skills
and expertise
across the Group
to support the
Foundation’s
charity partners.
Demonstrate
the impact of
the Berkeley
Foundation’s
work supported
by the Group.
Progress against targets
Exceptional people and resources: How we work
Achieved an industry-
leading Net Promoter
Score (NPS) of +77.9,
compared to an industry
average of +61.4
(In-house Research,
December 2025).
Awarded Best UK
Homebuilder for
After Sales Care by
HomeViews, the UK’s
leading independent
customer review
platform.
Handed over 91% of
our homes with zero or
fewer than five defects
reported by customers,
compared to 31%
across the industry
(HBF, March 2026).
Contributed £530
million to community
infrastructure, whilst
delivering 550
public amenities
across our live
development sites.
Employees raised
£660,000 for the
Berkeley Foundation
and its charity partners,
supporting communities
in the places where
we work.
Achieved a 14%
reduction in scopes 1
and 2 GHG emissions.
Completed
>80 embodied
carbon
assessments
to date.
Celebrated 10 years of
biodiversity net gain
(BNG), with strategies
created for 56
developments to date.
Launched our revised
Waste Action Plan.
Received validation
for our new science-
based targets.
Secured a
prestigious double
‘A’ score from
CDP for Climate
Change and
Water Security.
Led health and safety
workshops with 10
scaffolding companies
as part of our Working at
Height campaign.
Partnered with
the Construction
Leadership Council
(CLC) on a project to
address silica risk
in worktops.
Built supply chain
resilience through
more than 95 new
and revised materials
supply agreements.
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
39 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Launched a Group-
wide ethnicity network
as part of our EDI
strategy.
Retained Gold
membership of The
5% Club, with 8.5%
of our employees in
'earn and learn'
positions.
Performance highlights
40 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT40 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Our Vision strategy update
Our Vision has been in place since
2010 and we review it regularly,
ensuring that it responds to our
business, industry and regulatory
context, and that our targets
continue to challenge us.
The latest review showed strong progress,
including meeting many of our targets. We have
therefore taken the opportunity to evolve
the strategy, with updated goals and targets
that keep us on track, leading the future of
urban regeneration and homebuilding.
This has allowed us to incorporate new areas,
such as the creation of Berkeley Living, our
Build to Rent platform.
We have also responded to feedback from
our people and other stakeholders by
streamlining our priority areas. This retains
the valuable content, while making the
strategyclearer and more compelling.
OUR
PRIORITIES
PLACES &
COMMUNITIES
HOMES &
CUSTOMERS
CLIMATE &
NATU R E
OPERATIONAL
EXCELLENCE
PEOPLE &
CULTURE
White City Living
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
41 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT41 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Priority Goal Link to stakeholdersWhy this is a priority
Link
to risks
HOMES &
CUSTOMERS
Delighting our
customers with
high quality
homes and
an industry-
leading buying
and renting
experience.
— Customers
— Communities and
local government
— Government,
regulators
and industry
— Investors
Putting our
customers at
the heart of
our decisions
and creating
homes of
lasting quality is
fundamental to
our brand.
6
10
— Customers
— Communities and
local government
— Government,
regulators
and industry
— Investors
Placeshaping
can strengthen
communities
and make a
lasting positive
difference to
people’s lives.
4
6
Working in
partnership to
create unique
places where
communities
thrive and people
feel like they
belong.
— Environment
— Customers
— Communities and
local government
— Supply chain
— Government,
regulators and
industry
— Investors
We believe
every business
has a duty
to tackle
environmental
challenges, on
a local, national
and global
scale.
8
Transforming
underused land
responsibly
to deliver
connected, low
carbon and
resilient places
where nature
thrives.
— Employees
— Communities and
local government
— Government,
regulators
and industry
— Investors
A positive
working culture
will help our
highly skilled
people to
flourish, and in-
turn drive long-
term success.
5
Cultivating an
environment
where people
are supported,
empowered
and united by a
shared purpose
and values.
— Employees
— Supply chain
— Communities and
local government
— Government,
regulators
and industry
— Investors
We want
to address
housing needs
by delivering
quality
homes safely,
efficiently and
responsibly.
9
Running a high
performing
and productive
business, with
safe, efficient
and responsible
practices.
10
11
12
Key | Principal risks
1
Economic outlook
4
Land availability and planning
7
Liquidity and financing
10
Product quality and reputation
2
Political outlook
5
Attracting and retaining
talented people
8
Sustainability and
climate change
11
Cost and availability
of materials and labour
3
Regulation and reporting
6
Sales demand and
mortgage availability
9
Health and safety
12
Cyber – data and security
42 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Our Vision in action
Our Vision helps to
move our business
and industry forward,
for the benefit of
our customers, our
partners, society
and our people.
This section highlights
key initiatives and
the progress we have
made across our
priority areas:
Key | Strategic priorities
HOMES &
CUSTOMERS
Learning from customer feedback
We deliver exceptional customer
service and quality homes by
seeking out, and learning from,
customer feedback.
Alongside surveying every
customer post completion, we
have completed pilot focus
groups at The Exchange and
Silkstream. We invited feedback
on all aspects of the pre and post
buying experience, including
communications, amenities, estate
management and specification.
Findings have been shared at our
Customer Service Committee and
a blueprint for changes agreed,
with more focus groups now
planned.
We also rolled out a live chat
service on our website, allowing
us to engage with potential
customers 24/7, and are
developing a new app to make
it even easier for customers to
leave feedback at a time that
suits them.
Award-winning customer service
Our customer service teams are
guided by Berkeley’s deeply
entrenched values; showing
great attention to detail, passion,
integrity and respect at every point.
This translates into award-winning
service that delights our customers.
We keep our customer-facing
teams up to date on best practice
through a rolling programme of
training, this year including the
use of AI and digitised processes.
Our customer service conference
brought together more than 60
leaders from across the business
with industry experts, to share
experiences and ideas.
Independent market research
agency In-house Research has
awarded us a Platinum Award for
Customer Satisfaction; the highest
level of recognition available. This
places Berkeley among the UK’s
top-performing homebuilders for
customer satisfaction for the 12
th
consecutive year.
Additionally, HomeViews, the only
independent review platform for
residential development in the UK,
has ranked Berkeley as the Best UK
Homebuilder for After Sales Care.
Our Platinum
Award for Customer
Satisfaction is reserved
for organisations
achieving the very
highest levels of
customer satisfaction,
reflecting outstanding
performance across
the entire homebuying
journey – from
communication and
updates, to build quality
at handover and the
support provided
through aftercare.
Tom Weston |
Chief Executive,
In-house Research
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
43 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Delivering homes for everyone
+77.9
Net Promoter Score (NPS)
compared to an industry
average of +61.4 (In-house
Research, December 2025)
97.8%
customers would recommend
us to a friend, compared to
an industry average of 93%
(HBF, March 2026)
Veterans Minister opening
Valour House, King’s Road Park
Carefully crafting
quality homes
From our stringent approach
to building safety to the final
finishes that are visible to our
customers, every detail of our
homes is carefully crafted to
ensure that they meet our
high standards for quality.
91%
of our homes had zero or
fewer than five defects, as
reported by our customers
We create mixed and balanced
communities, with quality tenure-
blind homes that cater to a range
of needs.
We have launched our first
Berkeley Living homes at
Alexandra Gate and Kidbrooke
Village. Our mission is to be a
trusted landlord of exceptional
homes in vibrant communities,
extending Berkeley’s passion for
quality, placemaking and customer
service into a seamless rental
experience.
Our masterplans prioritise early
delivery of affordable homes, and
we continue to work with partners
to accelerate their delivery on
long-term regeneration sites; this
year agreeing a deal with London
Borough of Tower Hamlets to
bring forward 223 homes for
social rent several years ahead of
schedule, supported by a grant
from the GLA.
At King’s Road Park we opened
Valour House; providing high
quality, affordable homes for
veterans and their families –
marking the biggest investment in
social rent housing for UK Armed
Forces veterans in decades. This
development, delivered with The
Stoll Foundation, provides 128
new homes, community spaces,
therapy spaces, an adapted gym
and new offices for front-line staff.
44 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Our Vision in action continued
Placeshaping through our
Communities Framework
On every site we want to help
create a place where people feel
connected and able to influence
what is going on.
Our Communities Framework
provides a structured approach
to getting this right, based
on key principles of being
open, inclusive, long-term,
proportionate and collaborative.
This is then brought to life
through our Community Plans,
which consider the physical and
social fabric of each site, and put
the framework into action. We
currently have 45 Community
Plans in place.
Together, they help us to
design places with a carefully
considered mix of amenities, and
then to ensure that these spaces
are activated and accessible to
local people.
HOMES &
CUSTOMERS
Key | Strategic priorities
550
community facilities being
delivered on our live sites
We believe that partnership
working is the key to
creating unique places
where communities thrive.
It enables us to design
developments that respond
to local needs, promote local
interests, and foster a sense
of belonging.
Following our Communities
Framework and Community
Engagement Guidance, our
project teams run structured
programmes of engagement
with local stakeholders
from the earliest project
vision stage.
The feedback is carefully
considered by the design
team and then progress
is reported back to
the community. This
transparency is an important
aspect of community
engagement and promotes
accountability on both sides.
Engagement strategies
are adapted to each
site, and can include co-
design workshops, design
committees, and interactive
sessions with arts or
activities that help bring the
proposals to life. This can
help us to reach traditionally
unheard groups.
At Silkstream, local students
took part in a design
workshop with the project
and landscape architects,
gave feedback and shared
ideas for the public realm
and commercial spaces.
Collaborating
with local
partners
Through our Community
Plans we identify local
organisations to partner
with, so we can deliver
benefits outside of our site
boundary. We work with
these local experts to offer
time, talent and training for
people and projects that
need them most.
This means that the local
community feels the
benefits of regeneration
directly, early on in the
project.
Grand Union, Brent
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
45 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Activating green spaces
Across our developments we
deliver the green open spaces
that a strong community needs,
and we also understand the
importance of driving visitors to
them, to maximise their impact
over time.
We work collaboratively across
our community, sustainability,
estate management and
customer teams to create
interest in these parks and
landscaped spaces, so more
people feel the benefits of
connecting with nature.
This includes pop-up projects
such as the London School
of Architecture Pavillion
at Woodberry Down, and
permanent community facilities
like Men’s Sheds at Hartland
Village, supporting male
mental health.
At The Green Quarter we run a
year-round community health
and wellbeing programme, with
open-air activities that bring the
parkland to life.
Celebrating
local heritage
By preserving, restoring and
honouring the heritage of our
sites, we create places with a clear
identity, character and connection
to their past.
We do this across sites of
industrial and historical
significance, by thoughtfully
restoring heritage assets, and
delivering community events that
celebrate the site’s past through
our Community Plans.
This takes many forms including
site tours, engagement activities
with local schools, and public
events. At King’s Road Park
and Royal Arsenal Riverside
we hold remembrance events
at the war memorials, which
are an important feature of the
public realm.
On former National Grid sites
we have preserved sections of
gasholders and display them as
public art, or integrate the full
structures into building designs.
This year we completed the
restoration of the Grade II Listed
Mansion House at Trent Park, in
close collaboration with Historic
England and the Trent Park
Museum Trust. This will reinstate
public access for the first time
in decades, with a museum set
to open on the lower floors
this summer.
The Green Quarter, Ealing
Regent’s View, Bethnal Green
46 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Our Vision in action continued
Creating jobs and training opportunities for local people
Our employment and skills
programmes are a highly
impactful way that we help local
people to feel the benefits of
regeneration early on.
Dedicated coordinators work
with community partners
to connect local people
with construction jobs and
apprenticeships directly
with Berkeley, or within our
supply chain.
We also reach out to
schoolchildren and students
around our developments,
offering site visits, presentations,
and work experience placements
to encourage them to consider
careers in construction. The
long-term nature of our
regeneration schemes means
that we see people returning
to Berkeley for work years
after our teams meet them
as schoolchildren.
We also combine our skills
programmes with community
outreach, to target vulnerable
and hard-to-reach groups. At
Bermondsey Place, in the heart
of Southwark’s Old Kent Road
Opportunity Area, we worked
with Milk Honey Bees to support
and empower local young
black women in finding a
route to work.
This also extends to our
engagement through the
Berkeley Foundation, where we
reach young people through
community partnerships,
and connect them with work
experience, training and job
opportunities.
Inspiring the next generation with apprentice ambassadors
We encourage our apprentices
to get involved in community
outreach and share their
first-hand experiences. They
attend careers fairs and panel
events, host site tours, and
support young people on work
experience placements.
Their advocacy is a powerful
tool to inspire the next
generation of talent.
HOMES &
CUSTOMERS
Key | Strategic priorities
Scan the
QR code to
hear from Milk
Honey Bees
alumni
Student visit to Lombard Square, Plumstead
Apprentices at a careers event
with Southwark College
410
skills events held with schools,
colleges and universities
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
47 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Capturing our social impact at The Green Quarter
Our experience shows that
regeneration can be a powerful
force for good, with a reach far
beyond the boundary of our
developments.
As our neighbourhoods grow,
we collect feedback from our
partners and keep records of
all the activities, initiatives,
and relationships we maintain.
Together this helps us to evidence
our positive impact, and tailor our
approach to meet local needs.
At The Green Quarter in Ealing this
has been captured in a series of
social impact reports, which shows
how meaningful partnerships with
local people and groups, together
with a bespoke Community Plan,
have brought the former gasworks
to life as a vibrant community-led
neighbourhood.
A decade into the transformation
of this 88-acre site, one of the
UK’s most ambitious regeneration
projects, we have now undertaken
our third impact report. This
included an independent review
of quality of life for residents,
which indicated that the green
open spaces positively contribute
to people’s health and happiness.
Investment in social infrastructure
managed by local organisations
has also been impactful. Parkside
Yards, operated by Open Southall,
is a hub for local businesses
that includes a multi-purpose
community space.
The Green Quarter, Ealing
>5,100
people reached during
the year
£25,000
annual Community Chest fund
>100
local students hosted for site
tours during the year
57
community events in the year
The community
engagement is
on another level,
with something
for everyone,
from young
children to
older residents.
A resident of
The Green Quarter
Scan the
QR code to
see the Social
Impact Report
48 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Our Vision in action continued
>590
acres of publicly accessible
green space being delivered
on live sites
56
developments committed
to BNG to date
Reflecting on a decade of implementation
Berkeley became the
first homebuilder to set a
commitment to achieve a
biodiversity net gain (BNG)
on every development in 2016,
eight years before it became
mandatory for developers,
and we are now proud to
be celebrating a decade of
enhancing nature across
our sites.
In that time, our approach has
been highlighted by Government
as an example of successful
delivery, and we have shared
lessons learned with the industry.
These include recommendations
to engage on biodiversity
early, work collaboratively with
experts, incorporate a variety
of habitats to support species
diversity, and to connect nature
within the development to the
wider natural landscape.
We are now starting to see
some of our earliest BNG sites
maturing, allowing us to start
assessing the real net gain
delivered against the target
figure. Ecologists have now
revisited King’s Road Park and
a walk-over survey concluded
that Phase 1 has delivered
a BNG of 227%.
There were several lessons
learnt from this post-completion
assessment, which we are
now addressing on similar
developments:
— Use more native scrub
planting rather than
introduced and decorative
shrub;
— Introduce more areas of
meadow grassland providing
a habitat for insects and
flowers for pollinators;
— Use a wide range of grassland,
wildflower and sedum species
and include other habitat
features, such as bricks for
solitary nesting bees or logs;
and
— Enhance internal processes to
track BNG for the long term.
10 years of biodiversity net gain
Kidbrooke Village, Greenwich
Lombard Square, Plumstead
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
49 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
HOMES &
CUSTOMERS
Key | Strategic priorities
Connecting people
with nature
We prioritise delivering BNG
on site, so people can enjoy the
benefits of connecting with nature
on their doorstep. We incorporate
nature in different ways, such
as wildflower meadows, nature-
based play areas, wetlands and
quiet green areas to relax in.
People are encouraged to explore
these spaces through networks
of wildlife trails, walkways and
cycle routes.
New green spaces on our live
developments include:
— Heron Wharf: 1.5-acre public
park, opening up the banks
of the River Lea for the first
time in generations, including
a mosaic habitat with areas of
rich and poor soils, and shade
and light, which supports a mix
of flora and fauna.
— Foal Hurst Green: 11.5-acre
wildflower meadow. Pollen and
nectar seeds have been sown
and wild grasses, log and brash
piles included to create natural
habitats.
— Lombard Square: 1.8-acre
park with pond and wildflower
planting.
Delivering nature-rich places
like these earned Berkeley
the Biodiversity Protection
Award at the 2025 National
Sustainability Awards.
Designing resilient
landscapes
We create habitats that are
resilient to future climate change.
This includes planting trees to
create shading, incorporating
sustainable drainage features
to reduce the risk of flooding,
and creating varied habitats that
support a diversity of species.
>45
acres of wetlands being
delivered on live sites
Long-term
management
Our BNG strategies are designed
to deliver enduring spaces
for nature. Over the year we
have begun a programme
of engagement with our key
managing agents to upskill and
prepare us for the long-term
management of BNG. In response
to their feedback we have
begun preparing a tracker for
our teams to record all habitats
and nature-related actions, to be
used in the handover to estate
management teams.
Heron Wharf, PoplarGreen Park Village, Reading
50 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Our Vision in action continued
HOMES &
CUSTOMERS
Key | Strategic priorities
Driving down carbon
with our supply chain
By collaborating with our supply
chain we are able to realise
more significant reductions in
carbon emissions.
Over the year we held more
than 20 meetings with suppliers
and manufacturers to find
ways to drive down embodied
carbon, and to understand how
they can help us to meet our
low embodied carbon targets.
The meetings covered a
range of products including
bricks, blocks, paint, drainage
and piping. We learnt more
about where they are on their
sustainability journey and
how they are driving down
the embodied carbon of their
products. The discussions
demonstrated a shared
commitment to progress and
laid a solid foundation for future
collaboration and improvement.
Having launched our internal
guide to procuring low carbon
concrete in 2024/25, more
than 90% of the concrete
we used this year was lower
carbon. Wehave adopted
ECOPact lowcarbon concrete
at Wandsworth Mills, and have
used a low carbon steel frame
atArch &Bloom.
Measuring
and managing
water use
Taking action through our
Net Zero Transition Plan
Controlling water use is
important for the resilience of
our business, and in managing
our impact on the environment.
Our site teams follow guidance
on water efficiency for all
projects, and we are working to
reduce the risk of leaks on sites.
Our water usage fluctuates
according to variables such as
type of construction activities
and the weather. In drier spells
we use more water to reduce
dust and mitigate the impact
of construction works on
ourneighbours.
The homes we are delivering
have an average internal
water efficiency of 100.9
litres per person per day; a
16% improvement on building
regulation requirements.
Our transparency and
approach has been recognised
with an ‘A' rating from CDP for
Water Security.
We have published our Net Zero
Transition Plan, setting out a
roadmap to decarbonise our
homes, business activities and
supply chain, with the ambition
of achieving net zero emissions
by 2045.
The plan establishes how we
intend to meet our science-based
targets, revalidated in 2025, to
reduce emissions across scopes
1, 2 and 3. It is structured around
three core areas of focus: low
carbon operations, low carbon
homes and low embodied carbon.
We have reduced scopes 1 and
2 (market-based) emissions by
81% compared to 2019. New
homes are being delivered to
high levels of energy efficiency
and are designed to be net zero
ready to align with the Future
Homes Standard. We have
developed a robust, evidence-led
approach to embodied carbon,
informed by more than 80 site-
specific assessments and close
collaboration with our supply
chain. These insights are enabling
us to drive practical improvements
while maintaining build quality
andresilience.
Progressing the next phase of
Berkeley’s transition will require
continued industry collaboration,
investment, and a supportive
policy environment that enables
innovation. We will continue to
take a leading role, sharing our
experience and practical learning
to support collective progress
across the sector.
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
51 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Reducing energy use
Having successfully reduced
our reliance on carbon-intensive
energy sources and achieved
our initial science-based target
for scopes 1 and 2 emissions, we
have been focusing on lowering
overall energy consumption
across our operations and on
increasing the use of cleaner
energy sources.
This year we have prioritised
reducing out-of-hours energy
use across our sites and offices,
by setting clear internal targets,
and sharing best practices to
reduce consumption.
Additionally, we worked across
the Group to accelerate the
uptake of on-site photovoltaic
panels. We have built on our
experience with solar panels,
captured lessons learnt
and developed guidance to
support teams with their
procurement, installation
andongoingmanagement.
Planning resources
and reducing waste
This year, we have reduced our
construction waste intensity
by 13% compared to 2025.
We reviewed the waste created
on main packages of historic
projects, and identified our key
waste streams: plasterboard,
timber, metal, concrete and
bricks. Benchmarks were then set
for future packages, so project
teams can plan and predict
waste and help identify areas for
improvement where needed.
This work has informed the
development of revised waste
targets and our updated Waste
Action Plan, which focuses on
the application of the waste
hierarchy, procurement and
supply chain engagement, and
enhanced data quality and
performancemonitoring.
At Sutton Garden Square we
worked with our supply chain
to divert 70 tonnes of steel from
an existing structure on site to
bereused.
Heat pumps: preparing for the future
In preparation for the Future
Homes Standard, we reviewed
our development pipeline to
ensure our projects are aligned
with the anticipated regulatory
requirements and can deliver
low carbon heating.
Our technical teams have
worked with our consultants to
update designs, and we have
worked closely with our supply
chain to review the heat pump
installations to date.
We have also gathered
feedback from our customers to
enable us to transfer the lessons
learnt to new developments.
Responding to this customer
feedback will help us to ensure
comfort and ease of operation
for residents, as we roll out this
sustainable heating solution
more extensively.
At Silkstream we revised the
original energy strategy to
provide an exhaust air heat
pump (EAHP) for each home.
Across three buildings, totalling
254 homes, we have saved 2,610
tCO
2
per annum, given scope for
the newest technologies to be
incorporated on future phases,
and reduced resident service
charges related to energy.
Our customer teams have
worked closely with residents
at this development to educate
them on using EAHPs, including
creating a film about how
they work, and have collected
feedback from them on
theirexperience.
14%
reduction in scopes 1 and 2
(market-based) emissions
since2024/25
52 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT52 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
HOMES &
CUSTOMERS
Key | Strategic priorities
Putting equity, diversity
and inclusion into practice
We recognise the importance
of attracting and retaining
talented people from a wide
range of backgrounds, including
those who have historically been
underrepresented in our industry.
As such, equity, diversity
and inclusion (EDI) is being
embedded within our business,
and we have taken action across
several areas this year:
— Launched a Group-wide
ethnicity network, to amplify
the voice of people from
diverse backgrounds.
— 14 employees participated in
Business in the Community's
cross-organisational
mentoring circle for people
from ethnic minorities.
— Held events celebrating
women, promoting allyship
and discussing challenges
facing women in the
workplace.
— Enrolled 10 women on The
Circle Academy, an industry-
wide female leadership
programme.
— Piloted a networking initiative
to connect female talent.
— Ran a range of LGBTQ+
network events, joined the
Pride in London parade and
sponsored industry group
Pride in Property event.
Promoting
early careers
We are a Gold member of The
5% Club, a network of leading
employers committed to ensuring
at least 5% of the direct workforce
are in 'earn and learn' positions.
We have been placed second in
The JobCrowd’s top apprentice
employer national rankings,
and first in our sector for both
apprentices and graduates.
Our pilot to create realistic pre-hire
assessments, helping to improve
retention of emerging talent, was
cited in a report by the Home
Builders Federation (HBF) and The
Careers & Enterprise Company
on how to support a stronger
talent pipeline.
We have extended our Future
Skills programme to include
T Levels, a two-year technical
qualification that requires
students to undertake a
placement of 45 days or more.
We have supported 44 T Level
students in the year, across four
different courses.
We also support the Gatsby
initiative, Talking Futures, which
aims to educate parents on the
advantages of T Levels and
apprenticeships.
8.5%
of employees in
'earn and learn' roles
Our Vision in action continued
Getting involved with
the Berkeley Foundation
Support for the Berkeley
Foundation is a core part of life
at Berkeley.
A 2026 survey of Berkeley
employees’ perceptions of the
Foundation found high levels of
pride in the Company’s support
for the Foundation, and a strong
belief in the difference the
Foundation’s work is making
in local communities.
This year, employees got
involved by fundraising,
volunteering and through
Berkeley’s successful payroll
giving scheme.
They raised £660,000 for the
Foundation and its charity
partners, and volunteered 1,980
hours of time and expertise.
We celebrated employee
involvement in the Foundation’s
work through the 2026 Berkeley
Foundation Awards, which
recognised the exceptional
contributions our colleagues
make to local charities and
communities.
Gold
2025/26
Read more about the Berkeley
Foundation on page 57
53 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
White City Living –
realising positive change through regeneration
Strategy in action
53 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
This has been an award-winning
year for White City Living, with
accolades for the quality of
both the development and the
approach to production. Our Site
Manager accepted the overall UK
Supreme Award at the National
House Building Council’s (NHBC)
2025 Pride in the Job awards: the
third time the team has received
this top honour for excellence
across six key areas of operations.
The WhatHouse? 2025 Best
Development Award recognised
White City Living’s ‘exceptional
homes, destination-level facilities
and authentic community
integration’. One such example is
a creative project with students
of nearby Ark Burlington Danes
Academy, who have created
artwork inspired by White City
that has been displayed across
the public realm. Judges also
noted the quality of design and
hard landscaping. This has been
complemented by the addition of
the tallest building in the latest
collection at Solaris.
The project team found many
ways to make positive changes
on site this year, including driving
down waste. Working with
contractors, they have reduced
plasterboard offcuts by making
changes at the design and
installation stages.
Using a unitised façade product
has reduced in-situ construction
at White City Living, which
inherently creates less waste, and
the wooden packaging crates
have been diverted to a social
enterprise that sells timber
from construction sites.
A leak detection system has been
installed, giving the capability to
immediately identify and respond
to water wastage on site.
WhatHouse?
Awards 2025
Best Developmen
t
340
people reached through
community engagement
and skills programmes
this year
Scan the QR code
to read more on
White City Living
54 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT54 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT54 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Our Vision in action continued
HOMES &
CUSTOMERS
Key | Strategic priorities
Leading
building safety
We have actively worked with
Government and industry
to help evolve policy and
guidance in support of the
Building Safety Act.
Berkeley leaders played a
pivotal role in shaping the
Construction Leadership
Council’s (CLC) guidance
document on the Gateway 2
submission process for high
risk buildings, which launched
in 2025, and also promoted
it within the industry. It is
positive that we have now
started to see our first
applications move through
theGateway 2 process.
We also took part in a working
group on high risk building
control, alongside the Ministry
of Housing, Communities and
Local Government (MHCLG)
and industry membership
organisations.
We have upskilled our
employees and worked with
our supply chain to ensure
we have the necessary
competencies in place to meet
its requirements. In addition,
our senior production staff
have attended mandatory
briefings to understand
Berkeley’s approach and
latest industry guidance.
Running consistently safe sites
We are committed to operating
incident and injury free. Our
approach to health and safety
is based on three core pillars:
Good Order, Good Work, and
Good Health. These guide how we
maintain the highest standards in
the physical work environment,
promote a positive culture and
behaviours, and enhance health
and wellbeing.
We continue to hold an industry-
leading Annual Injury Incidence
Rate (AIIR) for the year at 100 per
100,000 people, compared
to an industry average of 280
(HSE, November 2025).
Our high standards of health
and safety, entrenched in robust
management systems, have been
recognised by the Royal Society
for the Prevention of Accidents
(RoSPA); awarding Berkeley the
President’s Award and four Gold
awards at its 2025 Health and
Safety Awards.
In the year we held health
and safety workshops with 10
scaffolding companies to promote
best practice and reduce the risk
of incidents arising from working
at height.
>10,000
hours of training delivered on
building safety during the year
to nearly 800 employees
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
55 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT55 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Engaging on product safety
This year the MHCLG issued the
Construction Products Reform
White Paper, with the objective
to ensure all products are safe
and trusted, and there is clear
accountability at every stage.
To support this, Berkeley co-
founded a Construction Products
Reform working group, providing
industry feedback on the practical
implementation challenges,
impacts and dependencies across
the construction supply chain, and
aiding effective transition planning.
We have also chaired a CLC
working group to review and
address the risks of processing
solid surface worktops containing
silica, finding practical solutions
to mitigate related health
impacts in the short term, and to
eliminate them in the long term.
Taking action on modern slavery and labour abuse
In line with government
guidance, we have identified
Berkeley’s most prominent
modern slavery risks and are
actively working with our
supply chain on ways to prevent
harm from modern slavery and
labourabuse.
All Berkeley employees are
required to complete training
on combatting modern slavery
as part of their induction to
the business, as well as tailored
sessions for project leads.
Bespoke training has also been
delivered to commercial teams,
which includes information
on modern slavery and labour
abuse, to highlight the risks in
the procurement process.
We have built upon established
relationships with our supply
chain, engaging contractors
and manufacturers on our
collaborative approach to
tackling modern slavery and
labour abuse. This includes
arranging visits to factories
or head offices.
We have also set new
commitments to help us
deepen our understanding
of the risk of labour abuse
within our extended
contractor supply chain.
Scan the QR code
to read our Modern
SlaveryStatement
Harnessing the power of AI
Digitising processes
We are using artificial
intelligence (AI) in carefully
considered ways across
our operations.
We are rolling out AI agents,
along with expert-led training
to use them more confidently
and effectively. AI technology
has been used on site to
enhance health and safety
procedures, by scanning live
sites and raising real-time alerts
on potentialrisks.
Proposals to incorporate
AI into operational reporting
have also been presented
to senior leaders by the
youth board of one of our
operatingcompanies.
Expanding
digital
collaboration
We have now fully
implemented an Electronic
Document Management
System, which allows us to
store, share and capture the
golden thread of information
more easily with our
contractors and consultants.
Our teams also continue to
use Building Information
Modelling (BIM) as a digital
collaboration tool.
We have trialled an AI-
powered tool to collect
lessons learnt and new ideas
from colleagues. We used the
digital tool to run a targeted
campaign on efficiency and
innovation, and invited teams
to give their ideas. Comments
were available for everyone to
view and vote for. The most
popular posts were presented
to senior leaders and follow-
up actions were agreed. The
project was successful and
there are now plans to roll it
out across the business.
We have trialled a digital
procurement tool, which
will bring together multiple
processes on one platform
and give a single view of
contract status, subcontractor
engagement and supply
chain risk.
We are now preparing to roll
it out more widely, to enhance
the procurement process and
collaboration with contractors
and consultants. We have also
procured an invoice automation
tool, to make our financial
processes more efficient.
56 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT56 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Our Vision in action continued
HOMES &
CUSTOMERS
Key | Strategic priorities
A safe place
to call home
Journey to
employment
Health and
wellbeing
Youth
leadership
A resilient
voluntary sector
We want to ensure
everybody in our
communities has
somewhere safe,
secure and sustainable
to call home.
We want to ensure
that all young people
are prepared for
work and have the
opportunity to build a
sustainable career.
We want to ensure
that young people
and their communities
have the support they
need to live happier,
healthier lives.
We want to ensure
that young people
are empowered to
positively impact their
own lives and the
communities in which
they live.
We want to ensure
that young people
and their communities
are supported by a
voluntary sector that
is effective, inclusive
and well resourced.
—Renewed its strategic
partnership with
Camden-based charity
New Horizon Youth
Centre, committing a
further £510,000 to
its work with young
people experiencing
homelessness
inLondon.
—Continued its
long-term strategic
partnerships with
Crisis, taking a place-
based approach to
ending homelessness
in Brent and Money
Ready, preventing
homelessness by
providing high quality
financial education for
those young people
most at risk.
—Entered its 15th year
of support for The
Change Foundation’s
training-for-work
programme, Street
Elite. It also continued
its partnership with
Imperial College
London to inspire
children and young
people to engage in
Science, Technology,
Engineering and
Mathematics (STEM).
—Increased the
employability
support on offer
through its charity
partnerships. A wide
range of Berkeley site
tours, employability
workshops, mentoring
and work experience
placements were
delivered to young
people referred by
the Foundation's
partners, culminating
in four young people
moving into work with
the business or its
supplychain.
—Continued to
support its strategic
partnerships with
The Mayor’s Fund
for London, tackling
holiday hunger among
young Londoners
and The Lord’s
Taverners, enabling
disabled young people
across the country to
participate in sport.
—Berkeley staff
raised more than
£418,000 for local
health and wellbeing
charities this year,
ranging from
inclusive sporting
opportunities to
children’s hospices.
—The Berkeley
Foundation and
Lord’s Taverners
won the National
Commitment to the
Community Award
at the Better Society
Awards 2026.
—Berkeley colleagues
assisted the
Foundation’s strategic
partner Groundwork
London with its
youth leadership
programme, providing
feedback on the
young participants’
social action projects.
—Launched a new
funding programme
targeting small-
to-medium-sized
organisations working
to build leadership
skills in young people
affected by racist or
Islamophobic violence.
—The Foundation
continued its work
with small-to-medium-
sized charities to
strengthen their
organisational
resilience, their ability
to plan for, cope
with, and respond
tochange.
—Across the 20 charities
and Community
Interest Companies
(CICs) funded through
the first two cohorts
of the Foundation’s
Resilience Fund,
over 70% increased
their income over
the course of the
partnership. On
average, participating
organisations rated
themselves 34% more
resilient by the end of
the programme.
Impact goal2026 key highlights
Scan the QR code
to find out more about
the Berkeley Foundation
£660k
raised by Berkeley employees
for the Foundation and its charity
partners through fundraising and
Give As You Earn (GAYE)
£3.3m
given to the Foundation’s
charity partners through grants,
staff fundraising and GAYE
>15,000
people reached through the
Foundation’s charity partnerships
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
57 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT57 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
The Berkeley Foundation
The Berkeley Foundation helps
frontline charities create change
in the communities where
Berkeley works.
The Foundation works in
partnership with a diverse range
of charities that share its goals,
from preventing homelessness
to supporting young people
into work. Its partnerships are
long-term and multi-layered,
delivering impact through flexible
funding, staff engagement
and collaborative learning
opportunities.
This year, the Foundation worked
with 35 frontline charities across
London, Birmingham and the
South of England to drive change
across its five impactgoals.
58 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT58 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
ESG performance
We monitor a range of Environmental, Social and
Governance (ESG) indicators across our business activities.
Scan the QR code
for data notes and
more metrics
Indicator Metric Unit 2026 2025 2024
Link to
priorities
New homes Homes delivered, including joint ventures # 4,203 4,329 3,927
Benchmarks
and indices
CDP Climate Change questionnaire Rating A B A
FTSE4Good Index Series listed company Y/N Y Y Y
ISS ESG Corporate Rating Rating B- B- B-
MSCI ESG Rating Rating AAA AAA AAA
S&P Global Corporate Sustainability Assessment #/100 74 69 56
Sustainalytics ESG Risk Rating (Note: smaller
values indicate lower risk)
Rating 12.5
(Low)
12.8
(Low)
14.0
(Low)
Environmental
Indicator Metric Unit 2026 2025 2024
Link to
priorities
Environmentally
responsible
operations
Number of environmental prosecutions # 0 0 0
Monetary cost of environmental fines, penalties
and enforcement undertakings
1
£#,000 125 0 0
Scopes 1 and 2 (location-based) emissions tCO
2
e 3,853 5,027 5,245
Scopes 1 and 2 (market-based) emissions tCO
2
e 773 896 917
Water withdrawals m
3
179,330 166,773 182,285
Total waste generated (including construction,
demolition and excavation wastes)
tonnes 307,591 274,747 388,765
Total waste diverted from landfill % 99 96 96
Sustainable
homes
2
Homes delivered on brownfield land % 90 92 87
Completed homes with an Energy Performance
Certificate (EPC) rating of at least B
% 96 95 93
Average EPC score and rating of completed homes # 85 (B) 84 (B) 84 (B)
Completed homes with an Environmental Impact
Rating (EIR) of at least B
% 98 96 96
Average Dwelling Emission Rate (DER)
of completed homes
kgCO
2
/
m
2
/yr
11.76 12.45 12.08
Average internal water efficiency
of completed homes
lpppd 100.9 102.2 101.2
Completed homes with internal recycling facilities % 94 100 100
Sustainable
places
Developments newly committed to deliver
biodiversity net gain (BNG)
# 1 2 1
% 100 100 100
Live development sites regenerating
brownfield land
% 75 72 75
Live development sites with sustainable drainage
systems (SuDS) being provided
% 100 100 100
Live development sites with cycle storage
being provided
% 100 100 100
Live development sites with electric car charging
infrastructure being provided
% 98 98 98
HOMES &
CUSTOMERS
Key | Our Vision priorities
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
59 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT59 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Social
Indicator Metric Unit 2026 2025 2024
Link to
priorities
Customer
experience
Six-month rolling average NPS (to March 2026) # 77.9 81.6 80.2
Customers who would recommend us to a friend
(to March 2026)
% 97.8 98.2 97.7
Quality Homes with five or fewer defects reported by
customers on completion
% 91 93 91
Society and
community
contributions
Contribution to UK GDP, including through direct
activities by Berkeley, indirectly through supply chain
spend and the induced effect of household spend
£bn 2.7 2.7 2.5
Contribution to UK tax, including taxes paid directly
by Berkeley and the taxes paid by customers and
suppliers as a result of Berkeley activities
£m 805 760 800
Contribution to facilities and services for local
communities, including affordable housing subsidies
£m 530 580 370
UK jobs supported annually directly and indirectly
through the supply chain
#,000 27 27 24
Charitable
giving and
the Berkeley
Foundation
Employees involved with Give As You Earn (GAYE) % 26 27 29
Employees involved with Berkeley Foundation
activities in the year
% 59 58 61
Skills and
training
Average monthly percentage of direct workforce
who are graduates, direct apprentices or sponsored
students undertaking formal training
% 8.5 8.7 9.5
Graduates joining the business via Berkeley’s
Graduate Scheme programme
# 23 29 21
Average monthly number of directly
employed apprentices
# 92 107 151
Health and
safety
AIIR per 100,000 people – direct employees and
on-site contractors
# 100 102 52
AIIR per 100,000 people – direct employees only # 0 39 36
AIIR per 100,000 people – on-site contractors only # 138 124 57
Work-related fatalities – direct employees and
on-site contractors
# 0 0 0
Accident Frequency Rate (AFR) per 100,000 hours
– direct employees and on-site contractors
# 0.04 0.05 0.02
Supply chain Average number of days taken to pay suppliers # 26 29 29
Average monthly number of on-site contractors #,000 6.5 7.3 8.8
Governance
Indicator Metric Unit 2026 2025 2024
Link to
priorities
Board of
Directors
Executive Directors # 3 2 2
Independent Non-Executive Directors # 7 7 7
Board of Directors – Male % 50 56 56
Board of Directors – Female % 50 44 44
Average tenure of Board of Directors yrs 6 7 6
Employees
(as of 30 April)
Total employees # 2,438 2,552 2,610
Total employees – Male % 59 60 62
Total employees – Female % 41 40 38
Non-Board senior management – Male
3
% 40 50 50
Non-Board senior management – Female
3
% 60 50 50
Reporting to Board or senior management – Male % 66 65 68
Reporting to Board or senior management – Female % 34 35 32
Metrics include joint venture activities.
1
Context to the figure reported for 2026 is provided on page 74.
2 Figures for ‘completed homes’ cover those that have legally completed, plus those completed for Berkeley Living.
3 Defined as those on the Executive Committee (as detailed on page 105) that are not members of the Main Board.
60 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT60 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Climate-related disclosures
Berkeley aims to play an active role
in tackling the global climate emergency.
Taking action on climate change
is vital to the resilience of our
business and our communities. In
recognition of this, it forms a key
part of our responsible business
strategy, Our Vision.
Having achieved our initial scopes
1 and 2 science-based target (SBT)
seven years early, this year we
secured validation from the Science
Based Targets initiative (SBTi)
for updated near-term targets to
2034 and a net zero goal for 2045.
These targets were the first by a
UK homebuilder to meet the SBTi
Buildings Criteria following their
publication for use by the sector.
Our recently published Net
Zero Transition Plan details a
20-year roadmap to help us
achieve our ambitious target for
net zero greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions across our entire value
chain by 2045. It is holistic and
transformative, encompassing our
direct business operations along
with the design of the new homes
and places we create. We know
that our strategy will evolve as we
respond to unforeseen challenges
and opportunities over the next
two decades. The transition will
require significant changes which
we cannot deliver alone; working
in partnership with our supply
chain and wider industry is key
to our success on this long and
complex journey.
In developing our climate-related
disclosures, Berkeley has reviewed
the TCFD report Recommendations
of the Task Force on Climate-
related Financial Disclosures,
including the 2021 Annex detailing
Guidance for All Sectors and
Supplemental Guidance for
Non-Financial Groups in relation
to Materials and Buildings. We
are pleased to confirm that our
disclosures are consistent with
these guidelines and align with the
UK Listing Rules (as referred to in
UK Listing Rule 6.6.6R (8)).
Our reporting covers many of
the requirements detailed within
UK Sustainability Reporting
Standards (SRS) S2 Climate-related
Disclosures, published in February
2026. This includes reference to
industry-based disclosure topics
defined in the Industry-based
Guidance on Implementing IFRS
S2, derived from SASB Standards.
Supplementing the content of
this report, Berkeley responds to
CDP’s corporate questionnaire
on an annual basis. This year we
were awarded a place on CDP's
prestigious corporate ‘A List’
for climate change, recognising
leadership level ambition,
transparency and performance.
We are delighted to have also
been named a CDP Supplier
Engagement Leader for our work
with the supply chain (see pages
50 and 64).
Climate progress
Ensuring that we take action
in relation to climate change
is not new to Berkeley,
with key milestones as follows:
2010
Set our first scopes 1 and 2
reduction targets as part of the
launch of Our Vision.
2014
Completed climate change
adaptation risk exercise identifying
flooding, overheating and water
shortage as the key risks forthe
homes and places we develop.
2016
Designed all new homes from this
date to incorporate climate change
adaptation measures.
2018
Initiated backing 100% of our
UK electricity consumption with
Renewable Energy Guarantees
of Origin (REGOs), with this
continuing to date.
2019
Undertook research on
designing low carbon homes and
implemented outcomes.
2020
Achieved validation from the SBTi
for our first SBTs, including a scope
3 intensity target.
2022
Undertook our first embodied
carbon assessments and completed
climate scenario analysis.
2024
Introduced a detailed supply chain
engagement strategy for high
impact material groups.
2025
Revised transitional risks and
opportunities through updated
climate scenario analysis.
Submitted energy reduction action
plan under ESOS.
Assessed heat pump technologies
to determine the most appropriate
for use in our homes.
2026
Received SBTi validation for new
absolute SBTs across scopes 1, 2
and 3, including a net zero target.
Published a Net Zero Transition Plan
aligned with our updated SBTs.
Awarded an ‘A’ rating from CDP
for climate change transparency
and performance.
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
61 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT61 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Theme Page reference Summary
Governance
61 to 62
• The Board is provided with climate action progress updates each quarter through
Our Vision reporting.
• CEO is the lead sponsor for climate action.
• CEO, CFO and COO attend monthly Our Vision and Sustainability Board meetings
covering key climate actions including targets and progress on our transition to
net zero.
• Executive Committee and Senior Leadership Team receive updates from the Group
Executive for Responsible Business on Our Vision, including Climate & Nature.
• Group Executive for Responsible Business and Group Head of Sustainability meet
with Group operational committees, divisional management teams and operational
sustainability teams to review progress and plan next steps.
• Climate-related matters are assessed at development level which informs strategic
business planning activity.
Strategy
63 to 65
• Our Net Zero Transition Plan is defined across three areas of focus and involves
engagement with stakeholders, in particular those across our industry, supply
chain and Government.
• Climate change monitored as part of the Group’s risk managementprocesses.
• Climate scenario analysis has identified key transitional risks in the short term
(0–2years) to medium term (to 2030) and physical risks in the long term (to 2050),
based on financial impacts and probabilistic loss modelling where possible.
• Consideration of climate change in preparing our Financial Statements is detailed
in Note 1.3 on page 185.
Risk
Management
66 to 71
• Climate scenario analysis completed in 2022, with transitional risks and
opportunities reviewed and updated in 2025.
• Main Board, Group Executive for Responsible Business, Group sustainability team
and operational teams all form part of the process to identify risks and assess their
relative importance, combining a top-down and bottom-up approach.
• Group Executive for Responsible Business and Group sustainability team manage
strategic compliance with evolving requirements.
• Divisional management teams embed risk management in our day-to-day
operations, integrating mitigation measures for each development as required.
Metrics
and Targets
72 to 76
• Science-based targets in place for scopes 1, 2 and 3 GHG emissions with
performance against these monitored and disclosed.
• Relevant key industry-based metrics identified and reported.
Governance
Involvement of our
CEO and other key
senior management
with responsibility for
climate action across
all levels and aspects
of the business is key
to the success of our
governance structure.
To provide a governance
framework for our approach,
Berkeley has an overarching
Climate Change Policydetailing
guiding principles of action.
Delivery of these is driven through
our Climate & Nature priority
area of Our Vision, incorporating
the Net Zero Transition Plan
and supported by Sustainability
Standards. These set out Berkeley’s
minimum requirements for our
homes and developments, as
well as our site and supply chain
activities, covering topics such as
energy efficiency, risk mitigation
measures and reporting. They
help to ensure that we are aligned
to deliver the key milestones and
strategic actions outlined within our
transition plan. Management tools
are in place to monitor action
and performance.
For example, each development
uses a Project Sustainability
Strategy to track compliance
with the Sustainability Standards
from land purchase through to
completion, whilst our online
data management system
allows for live reporting of GHG
emissions from our site, office,
sales and Berkeley Living landlord
activities to assess progress
against our scopes 1 and 2 SBT.
Our management tools enable
the regular communication of
performance across the business,
enabling insights and areas for
further action to be identified
and discussed.
62 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT62 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Climate-related disclosures continued
Berkeley’s governance structure for monitoring climate-related risks and opportunities, implementing
strategic actions to address these and monitoring performance is summarised below.
Key | Management roles with responsibility for climate action 
1
Chief Executive 
2
Chief Financial Officer 
3
Chief Operating Officer
4
Group Executive for Responsible Business 
5
Group Head of Sustainability
Main Board Level
Board of Directors Audit Committee
— Overall responsibility for oversight of our strategy and
management of climate-related risks and opportunities.
— Monitor progress towards strategic climate targets, with Board
reports including action taken and planned next steps.
— Review Group Risk Management Report presented at each Board
meeting, with sustainability and climate change considered as a
principal operating risk.
— Undertake annual assessment of principal and emerging
risks, along with the adequacy and effectiveness of internal
control systems.
— Oversight of Company-wide risk management process.
— Consider climate change impacts on the financial reporting
judgements and estimates in the Financial Statements
(seepage126).
Executive Management Level
Chief Executive Executive Committee and
Senior Leadership Team
Our Vision and
Sustainability Board  
1 2 4 53
— Designated as accountable lead sponsor
for the Climate & Nature strategic
priority under Our Vision.
— Review climate-related commitments
and actions to ensure that they are
ambitious and appropriate for
the business.
— Review and sign off detailed plans and
specifications of each development,
from land purchase through all stages
ofdevelopment.
— Assess and manage strategic and
operational risks.
— Discuss progress under the Climate
& Nature priority area and measures
to be implemented to further drive
improvement.
— Consists of CEO, CFO, COO, Group
Executive for Responsible Business and
Group HeadofSustainability.
— Meet monthly with Climate & Nature a
key topic on each agenda.
— Discuss progress against goals and
targets to agree planned next steps.
Group Level
Group Risk Function Group Responsible Business
and Sustainability Teams
Group Committees
andWorkingGroups
— CEO ensures the appropriateness of
theGroup’s risk management strategy.
— CFO leads on strategic risk
management, including oversight of
climate scenarioanalysis.
— Head of Risk manages Group risk
process and register, with sustainability
and climate change identified as a
principal operating risk.
— Identify strategic climate change risks
and opportunities facing the Group and
communicate these to the Head of Risk.
— Develop targets and strategic climate
action, including our transition to
netzero.
— Integrate actions into day-to-day
activities.
— Actively collaborate with external
experts and industry working groups.
— Operational committees (e.g. Technical
Committee and Sustainability
Committee) consisting of senior
representatives from each of our
businesses meet regularly, with climate
action raised by the attending Group
Executive for Responsible Business and/
or Group Head of Sustainability.
— Cross-disciplinary working groups
take action in specific areas, such as
embodied carbon and implementation
of the Future Homes and Buildings
Standards, guided by the Group Head
ofSustainability.
Operational Level
Divisional Management Teams Operational Sustainability Teams Development Project Teams
— Responsible for climate action in relation
to the specific developments of their
business.
— Nominate a local management sponsor
for Climate & Nature.
— Maintain a risk register for their business,
which includes sustainability and climate
change risks.
— Communicate business performance
to CEO and CFO at divisional
boardmeetings.
— Meet with Group Executive for
Responsible Business and Group
Head of Sustainability to identify
improvementareas.
— Dedicated sustainability practitioners
within each business.
— Support local management and
development teams to implement Group
Sustainability Standards and drive action
to achieve continual improvement.
— Collaborate with the Group responsible
business and sustainability teams.
— Monitor performance and present this
to the divisional management and
projectteams.
— Ensure Environmental Risk Register
in place throughout the lifespan of a
project, to identify and control risks
from land purchase through to design
andconstruction.
— Manage day-to-day energy efficiency,
implementation of new measures and
achievement of targets.
— Report key data and actions to enable
monitoring of Group-wide performance.
1 2
1
1 2
43 5
1 2 4 53
4 5
1 2 43
4 5
LOW CARBON
OPERATIONS
LOW CARBON
HOMES
LOW EMBODIED
CARBON
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
63 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT63 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Strategy
Our commitment to
becoming net zero by
2045 and addressing
climate risks and
opportunities is
underpinned by our
Climate & Nature priority
under Our Vision.
Decarbonisation ambitions
Berkeley’s Net Zero Transition
Plan provides a roadmap
for achieving our net zero
target, whilst responding
to key transitional risks and
opportunities for the business.
Climate scenario analysis
indicates that as we navigate the
implementation of the Future
Homes and Buildings Standards
in the short term, Berkeley has
higher exposure to transition risks
linked to planning and design
requirements and the substitution
of existing technologies with
lower emission options.
In the medium term, Berkeley
mayadditionally be more exposed
to higher raw material costs as a
result of carbon pricing policies
and the transition actionsof
our suppliers. A change in
customer demands is a moderate
opportunity in the medium term
should considerations suchas
energy efficiency become
increasingly important to
customers within their buying
andrenting decisions.
Berkeley’s Net Zero Transition
Plan details key milestones and
actions under three areas of focus
which align with these risks and
opportunities, along with our
SBTs: low carbon operations; low
carbon homes; and low embodied
carbon. The plan is based on our
current understanding of the
industry’s decarbonisation routes
and will be regularly reviewed
to ensure that it reflects the
evolving capabilities of our value
chain and changes to key risks
andopportunities.
We are committed to reporting
progress transparently. Highlights
for the year can be found on
pages 50 to 51.
Why this is a focus
We have the greatest ability to reduce
scopes 1 and 2 emissions related to the
energy used during our construction,
sales, office, vehicle fleet and Berkeley
Living landlord activities as these are
under our direct control.
Almost half of our scope 3 emissions
target relates to the regulated energy
use (such as heating, hot water and
lighting) of the homes that we are
creating for our customers.
Just over half of our scope 3 emissions
target relates to embodied carbon
arising from the activities of our supply
chain, from the energy used to extract
raw materials, processing these into
construction products and transporting
to site.
Key action areas
• Energy efficiency
• Renewable technologies
• Alternative fuels
• Electric and hybrid machinery
and fleet
• Low carbon heating and
cooling systems
• Fabric efficiency
• Electric-led systems through the use
of heat pumps and other renewable
technologies
• Decarbonisation of existing
heat networks
• Energy demand management
• Embodied carbon measurement
• Efficient design measures
• Manufacturer and supplier
performance and engagement
• Lower carbon materials and product-
specific carbon data
Link to business model
Building new homes and places Designing and planning new homes
and places
Building new homes and places
Marketing and selling new homes
Designing and planning new homes
and places
Building new homes and places
Link to transition risks and opportunities
Pricing of GHG emissions Planning and design requirements
Substitution of existing technologies
Change in customer demands
Planning and design requirements
Raw material costs
Scan the QR code to read
our Net Zero Transition Plan
64 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Engagement
We aim to ensure that our
decarbonisation efforts include a
fair and equitable ‘just transition’
that identifies potential effects on
our stakeholders.
As detailed in our transition
plan, progress will be subject
to dependencies such as
reforms to the power system
and industry-wide shifts to low
carbon alternatives for materials,
processes and technologies.
There are also the following
immediate challenges:
— Low numbers of suppliers and
contractors that measure their
emissions or have SBTs and
transition plans, particularly
across smaller companies.
— A changing policy and
regulatory landscape
for housing.
— Lack of capacity in the electricity
grid to connect new homes.
— Customer concerns around costs
and operational changes for non-
traditional heating solutions.
Collaboration is key to
addressing challenges, risks and
opportunities, and ensuring a
just transition. Recognising this,
Berkeley proactively engages
with key stakeholders, with key
activities as detailed below.
Our supply chain engagement
on the transition to a net zero
economy has led to Berkeley
being named as a CDP Supplier
Engagement Leader.
Climate-related disclosures continued
Stakeholder impacts Key engagement activities
Link to climate risks
and opportunities
Supply chain
Taking action to reduce
emissions will be a
challenge for our supply
chain, requiring the
adaptation of operations
and skills, whilst
minimising social impacts
such as inequalities or
job losses.
• Our Common Materials Strategy for key material groups
includes embodied carbon and other sustainability
requirements alongside technical compliance and quality.
• Detailed supply chain engagement for high impact materials
(concrete, steel, aluminium, glass and bricks) to assess the
maturity of key suppliers in their decarbonisation journey.
• Sustainability Standard for on-site contractors includes
requirements in relation to energy and carbon reporting, as
well as minimum energy efficiency measures.
• Partner of the Supply Chain Sustainability School, including
acollaboration project to deliver training to the supply chain
and SMEs on net zero.
Raw material costs
Substitution
of existing
technologies
Skills availability
to deliver low
carbonhomes
Government, regulators
and industry
We acknowledge the
need for a coordinated
industry approach and
that regulation can help to
drive this. Inconsistencies
can lead to a lack of trust
and investment, delaying
progress.
• Actively respond to Government consultations to share our
insights and experience on topics such as efficient design
standards and energy strategies.
• Meet with local and national Government representatives
and host visits to our development sites to directly engage
and demonstrate challenges andprogress.
• Active participants in industry working groups including the
UKGBC, FutureHomes Hub and CIBSE.
Planning
and design
requirements
Substitution
of existing
technologies
Customers and
communities
Solutions to address
climate change should not
come at an unaffordable
price to our customers
or negatively impact the
communities we help
tocreate.
• Development-specific information provided, including
climatechange mitigation and adaptation measures.
• Home demonstration given at handover to ensure that
customers are aware of technologies integrated into their
home and efficiency measures to reduce costs.
• Customer feedback used to provide insight into
technologies such as heat pumps.
Change in
customer
demands
Substitution
of existing
technologies
Employees
The transition to a low
emissions economy will
impact our workers due
to the rapid change in
required skills. We will
invest in training and
competency to manage
our transition.
• Sustainability training provided to all employees, with
subject-specific training (e.g. embodied carbon, Future
Homes
and Buildings Standards requirements) provided to
relevant departments.
• Awareness campaigns andinternal intranet to share best
practice.
Skills availability
to deliver low
carbonhomes
Kidbrooke Village, Greenwich
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
65 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Climate resilience
Berkeley recognises that whilst
many organisations have plans
in place to transition to a low
carbon economy, climatic changes
will occur and may affect our
operations, in addition to the
homes and places we develop.
Present day exposure to physical
risks has been assessed, with
changes in the long term (to
2050) considered in recognition
that physical risks can manifest
themselves over a longer
period. With low exposure to
physical risks in the present day,
climate scenario analysis shows
that areas in which Berkeley’s
developments are located will
see more heatwave days and a
corresponding increase in the
occurrence of prolonged drought
stress by 2050 under a 4°C ‘Hot
House World’ scenario.
Changes in precipitation
patterns with drier summers and
wetter winters could augment
the prevalence of subsidence
conditions, whilst sites at risk of
flooding could flood more often.
Key risks identified through
climate scenario analysis, such
as subsidence and flood risk, are
assessed prior to land acquisition,
with mitigation measures
implemented as necessary.
Our Sustainability Standards
additionally set minimum
requirements, including the
provision of sustainable drainage
systems (SuDS) and targeting
internal water efficiency levels
below building regulations,
delivered through the integration
of water efficient fixtures and
fittings. Measures such as these
help to ensure the resilience of
our homes and communities in a
changing climate.
Acknowledging the intrinsic link
between nature and climate,
Berkeley pioneered biodiversity
net gain (BNG) in our industry
from 2017 and follows an
integrated water management
approach whereby rainwater is
stored and released into natural
features to help manage surface
water, also reducing the urban
heat island effect.
Climate-related disclosures continued
66 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Risk management
Berkeley recognises
climate change within its
principal operating risks.
Our regular process to identify
and assess climate-related risk is
incorporated within the Group’s
risk management framework,
combining a top-down strategic
review and a bottom-up review
(see page 81).
The Group Executive for
Responsible Business and Group
Head of Sustainability identify and
monitor strategic climate-related
risks and opportunities facing
Berkeley through the evaluation
of: evolving legislation, regulation
and policy; customer feedback;
and industry and global trends.
Risks and opportunities are
identified for the short to medium
term (e.g. evolving planning and
design requirements) and long term
(e.g. transition to net zero carbon).
The risks and opportunities cover
our upstream value chain (such
as material costs), our direct
operations, and the impact on our
customers of a changing climate.
Identified risks and opportunities
are shared with the Head of Risk
and reported on at each Board
meeting, with feedback provided
back down the business to
operating companies.
To help ensure ongoing resilience,
our climate-related strategies are
regularly reviewed by the Group
Executive for Responsible Business
and Group Head of Sustainability,
along with Group operational
committees and working groups.
Where necessary, key processes
and controls such as our
Sustainability Standards
are updated.
A fundamental principle of the
operating structure of Berkeley
is that the prime responsibility
for assessing, managing and
monitoring the majority of
operational risks rests with
divisional management teams,
ensuring that risk management
is embedded in our day-to-day
operations. At a development level,
the site-specific Environmental
Risk Register and Project
Sustainability Strategy identify
risks and monitor action taken to
mitigate these from land purchase
through to completion.
Hareshill, Fleet
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
67 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Climate scenario analysis
Supplementing our regular
approach to risk management,
Berkeley undertakes climate
scenario analysis to assess risks
and opportunities relating to
the transition to a lower carbon
economy and the physical
impacts of climate change.
Climate scenario analysis is
overseen by the CFO, the Group
Executive for Responsible
Business and the Group Head
of Sustainability.
Selected climate scenarios
draw from widely used,
publicly available and peer
reviewed sources, including the
Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change (IPCC) sixth
assessment report (AR6) and
projections by the International
Energy Agency (IEA) as
summarised below.
The scenarios selected are not
intended to be forecasts for the
future, but provide mechanisms to
assess plausible outcomes against
which Berkeley can assess its risks
and opportunities.
The results of climate scenario
analysis are periodically updated
to ensure continued relevance.
Transition risks
and opportunities
In 2025, we reviewed climate
scenario analysis for transitional
risks and opportunities with the
support of Aon. The aim was to
revisit and update the original
outputs from our 2022 analysis,
based on a below 2°C orderly
transition. The results of the 2025
review remain relevant for 2026.
Transition risks and opportunities
were assessed in relation to
aggressive climate mitigation
measures in both the short term
(0–2 years) and medium term
(to 2030). Berkeley is considered
to have higher exposure to the
transition risks and opportunity
detailed on pages 68 to 69, albeit
none of these are considered
individually material in the context
of the Group’s current year
financial statements.
Berkeley has been assessed as
having lower exposure to the
following:
— Risks: Pricing of GHG
emissions; Climate-related
reporting obligations; Change
in customer demands;
Electric vehicle use; Investor
perceptions; Cost of capital;
Climate change litigation;
Skills availability to deliver
low carbon homes.
— Opportunities: Electric
vehicle use; Cost of capital;
Investor perceptions;
Employee perceptions; Other
stakeholder perceptions.
Details on the above can be found
in our climate scenario analysis
methodology online.
Physical risks
Berkeley undertook climate
scenario analysis for physical
risks with the support of WTW
(formerly Willis Towers Watson) in
2022. The results of this analysis
are still considered to be relevant
as we continue to develop across
London, Birmingham and the
South of England.
Physical risks have been assessed
from present day over the long
term to 2050, with the latter
being when the most significant
impacts are likely to manifest.
The table on pages 70 to 71
summarises the predominant
physical risks for the IPCC 1.5°C
(RCP 2.6) and 4°C (RCP 8.5)
scenarios. Risk exposure details
are for 2050 and beyond under a
4°C scenario.
Probabilistic loss modelling was
used to analyse the financial
impact of acute risks (windstorm
and flood) before any mitigation
or adaptation measures, and
irrespective of insurance or other
recovery or consideration of
financial responsibility for any
such losses.
As Berkeley already insures
against potential losses from
catastrophic events, the primary
cost exposure for Berkeley under
a 4°C scenario could be an
increase to insurance premiums
for assets under construction.
Scan the QR code
to read more about our
climate scenario analysis
methodology
Summary of scenarios
1.5°C scenario
IEA Net Zero
Emissions by 2050
and IPCC RCP 2.6
— Actions are taken
to reduce emissions
in the short term
and consequently
high transition risk is
experienced.
— Physical risks are less
severe than under
the 4°C scenario and
broadly similar to the
2°C scenario.
Below 2°C scenario
IEA Sustainable
Development
Scenario (SDS)
— Actions are taken
to reduce emissions
in the short term,
albeit slightly less
aggressive than the
1.5°C scenario, and
consequently high
transition risk is
experienced.
— Physical risks less
severe than under
the 4°C scenario and
broadly similar to the
1.5°C scenario.
4°C scenario
IPCC RCP 8.5
— Increased level of
warming associated
with greater levels
of acute and chronic
weather events.
— Geographic climatic
shift in the South East
of the UK.
68 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT68 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Transition risks
Key | Exposure  Low Moderate  High
Risk description Risk exposure and potential impact Mitigation strategy
Planning and design
requirements become
increasingly stringent as
part of the UK’s efforts
to reach net zero and
broader sustainability-
related targets.
Short term
    Medium term
As part of efforts to meet its net zero target, the UK is introducing increasingly
stringent requirements related to sustainability through policy and legislation,
such as the Future Homes and Buildings Standards.
Due to the long-term nature and scale of Berkeley’s developments often
requiring the use of masterplan-led energy strategies, we are particularly
affected. In the short to medium term, homes on future phases of
developments that are under construction may require a different heating
solution from those originally planned. For example, switching to the
installation of air source heatpumps. Cost impacts could be incurred through
the substitution of existing technologies, as described below.
Operational committees of relevant functions (Land and Planning, Technical and Sustainability) monitor and
discuss the evolving regulatory landscape and impacts on the business, taking action as required. To negate
potential additional cost impacts, emerging requirements form part of development appraisals at the land
purchase stage.
We also participate in industry initiatives such as the Future Homes Hub, established to facilitate the
collaboration needed within and beyond the new homes sector to help meet the climate and environmental
challenges ahead.
Substitution of existing
technologies with lower
emission options will
be required across our
developments to comply
withregulations.
Short term
    Medium term
Electrification of residential heating is fundamental to the Future Homes
Standard. The need to increase the capacity of the UK’s electricity
infrastructure may lead to constraints or additional costs. In addition, the
principle of ‘sleeving’ heat networks may particularly impact Berkeley, requiring
us to upgrade existing energy centres on our major regeneration sites with
heat pump technologies. There is the risk that technologies selected at the
outset of a planning process could become outdated and obsolete through the
development process and upon building completion. Should the technology
selected for our developments not perform as expected, there is the risk of
customer dissatisfaction and reputational damage.
The potential financial impact of this risk could be £1 million to £10 million in
the short to medium term.
Berkeley continually assesses nascent technologies and is incorporating heat pumps and photovoltaics
within its designs. Following comprehensive analysis of suitable options using ‘live-in’ trials at our Heron
Wharf development, we have identified the most appropriate exhaust air heat pumps (EAHPs) for use within
our homes.
At the same time, Berkeley is increasing customer engagement on the adoption of new technologies and
sharing feedback across the business to inform sales and customer service processes (see page 51).
We are engaging with relevant parties to ensure that necessary localised infrastructure upgrades are in place
to support additional electrical loads, whilst noting that there is also a dependency on the national electricity
grid to decarbonise.
Raw material costs could
increase if suppliers pass
through the impact of
carbon pricing for high
embodied carbon building
materials, or if demand for
low carbon alternatives
outstrips availability.
Short term
    Medium term
Key materials such as steel, concrete, cement and glass have energy intensive
production processes which could require increased energy input costs or be
subject to carbon tax regimes under low carbon emission scenarios. These and
the cost of suppliers implementing mitigation measures as part of their own
transition plans may be passed on tocustomers, including Berkeley.
Demand for lower carbon or sustainable alternatives may increase and outstrip
supply, potentially leading to increased costs and issues with lead-in times.
The potential financial impact of this risk could be less than £1 million in the
short term and £1 million to £10 million in the medium term.
Berkeley has a diverse supply chain drawing material from a wide range of suppliers and we regularly
assess material costs as part of development appraisals. We have more than 90 manufacturer design and
service level agreements to maintain high standards and continuity of supply regardless of changing and
unpredictable market conditions.
To help inform the efficient design of our buildings, embodied carbon assessments are undertaken. We also
use our supply chain engagement strategy to understand and drive down embodied carbon, forming Group-
wide agreements that enable us to access lower carbon alternatives at no or limited impact on costs
and programme.
Transition opportunity
Opportunity description Risk exposure and potential impact Realisation strategy
Change in customer
demands may lead to
an opportunity whereby
homes and buildings
with strong sustainability-
related credentials
arepreferable.
Short term
    Medium term
Whilst in the short term the scale of opportunity for higher demand is not
necessarily significant, as climate awareness and energy prices increase,
customers (including purchasers and those within the rental market) are
expected to favour homes and buildings with greater energy operational
efficiency. In addition, customer preference for new buildings with the latest
technologies could further support demand.
The potential financial impact of this opportunity could be less than £1 million
in the short term and between £1 million to £10 million in the medium term.
Berkeley’s focus on urban, brownfield regeneration is inherently more sustainable. Through our climate
actions and implementation of Sustainability Standards we look to positively influence customer demands.
For example, in 2023 we seta requirement for all new homes (excluding refurbishments) to meet a minimum
Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) rating of B, aligning to the requirements of many of the green
mortgages being offered by lenders.
We actively communicate sustainable features to customers throughout our sales process and plan to extend
this approach to our future rental customers, providing accessible and home-specific information.
Climate-related disclosures continued
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
69 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT69 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Risk description Risk exposure and potential impact Mitigation strategy
Planning and design
requirements become
increasingly stringent as
part of the UK’s efforts
to reach net zero and
broader sustainability-
related targets.
Short term
    Medium term
As part of efforts to meet its net zero target, the UK is introducing increasingly
stringent requirements related to sustainability through policy and legislation,
such as the Future Homes and Buildings Standards.
Due to the long-term nature and scale of Berkeley’s developments often
requiring the use of masterplan-led energy strategies, we are particularly
affected. In the short to medium term, homes on future phases of
developments that are under construction may require a different heating
solution from those originally planned. For example, switching to the
installation of air source heatpumps. Cost impacts could be incurred through
the substitution of existing technologies, as described below.
Operational committees of relevant functions (Land and Planning, Technical and Sustainability) monitor and
discuss the evolving regulatory landscape and impacts on the business, taking action as required. To negate
potential additional cost impacts, emerging requirements form part of development appraisals at the land
purchase stage.
We also participate in industry initiatives such as the Future Homes Hub, established to facilitate the
collaboration needed within and beyond the new homes sector to help meet the climate and environmental
challenges ahead.
Substitution of existing
technologies with lower
emission options will
be required across our
developments to comply
withregulations.
Short term
    Medium term
Electrification of residential heating is fundamental to the Future Homes
Standard. The need to increase the capacity of the UK’s electricity
infrastructure may lead to constraints or additional costs. In addition, the
principle of ‘sleeving’ heat networks may particularly impact Berkeley, requiring
us to upgrade existing energy centres on our major regeneration sites with
heat pump technologies. There is the risk that technologies selected at the
outset of a planning process could become outdated and obsolete through the
development process and upon building completion. Should the technology
selected for our developments not perform as expected, there is the risk of
customer dissatisfaction and reputational damage.
The potential financial impact of this risk could be £1 million to £10 million in
the short to medium term.
Berkeley continually assesses nascent technologies and is incorporating heat pumps and photovoltaics
within its designs. Following comprehensive analysis of suitable options using ‘live-in’ trials at our Heron
Wharf development, we have identified the most appropriate exhaust air heat pumps (EAHPs) for use within
our homes.
At the same time, Berkeley is increasing customer engagement on the adoption of new technologies and
sharing feedback across the business to inform sales and customer service processes (see page 51).
We are engaging with relevant parties to ensure that necessary localised infrastructure upgrades are in place
to support additional electrical loads, whilst noting that there is also a dependency on the national electricity
grid to decarbonise.
Raw material costs could
increase if suppliers pass
through the impact of
carbon pricing for high
embodied carbon building
materials, or if demand for
low carbon alternatives
outstrips availability.
Short term
    Medium term
Key materials such as steel, concrete, cement and glass have energy intensive
production processes which could require increased energy input costs or be
subject to carbon tax regimes under low carbon emission scenarios. These and
the cost of suppliers implementing mitigation measures as part of their own
transition plans may be passed on tocustomers, including Berkeley.
Demand for lower carbon or sustainable alternatives may increase and outstrip
supply, potentially leading to increased costs and issues with lead-in times.
The potential financial impact of this risk could be less than £1 million in the
short term and £1 million to £10 million in the medium term.
Berkeley has a diverse supply chain drawing material from a wide range of suppliers and we regularly
assess material costs as part of development appraisals. We have more than 90 manufacturer design and
service level agreements to maintain high standards and continuity of supply regardless of changing and
unpredictable market conditions.
To help inform the efficient design of our buildings, embodied carbon assessments are undertaken. We also
use our supply chain engagement strategy to understand and drive down embodied carbon, forming Group-
wide agreements that enable us to access lower carbon alternatives at no or limited impact on costs
and programme.
Opportunity description Risk exposure and potential impact Realisation strategy
Change in customer
demands may lead to
an opportunity whereby
homes and buildings
with strong sustainability-
related credentials
arepreferable.
Short term
    Medium term
Whilst in the short term the scale of opportunity for higher demand is not
necessarily significant, as climate awareness and energy prices increase,
customers (including purchasers and those within the rental market) are
expected to favour homes and buildings with greater energy operational
efficiency. In addition, customer preference for new buildings with the latest
technologies could further support demand.
The potential financial impact of this opportunity could be less than £1 million
in the short term and between £1 million to £10 million in the medium term.
Berkeley’s focus on urban, brownfield regeneration is inherently more sustainable. Through our climate
actions and implementation of Sustainability Standards we look to positively influence customer demands.
For example, in 2023 we seta requirement for all new homes (excluding refurbishments) to meet a minimum
Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) rating of B, aligning to the requirements of many of the green
mortgages being offered by lenders.
We actively communicate sustainable features to customers throughout our sales process and plan to extend
this approach to our future rental customers, providing accessible and home-specific information.
70 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT70 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Climate-related disclosures continued
Chronic physical risks
Acute physical risks
Risk description Risk exposure and potential impact Mitigation strategy
Heat stress set to
increase with more
frequent heatwave
daysannually.
Present day heat stress is very low throughout the UK (less than five heatwave
days a year). The majority of England (in particular the South East, the South
West and the Midlands) could be exposed to more material heat stress by
mid-century with the potential for more than 20 heatwave days annually.
Correspondingly, 84% of Berkeley’s homes could be exposed to heat stress in
the decades beyond 2050.
There is the potential for overheating in our homes due to heatwave days,
exacerbated by the urban heat island effect.
Berkeley introduced a bespoke internal overheating risk assessment in 2016 to ensure that all project teams
assessed and mitigated this risk. Overheating risk is now incorporated within the 2021 Building Regulations
and, where homes are deemed to be at a higher risk, detailed dynamic thermal modelling is undertaken.
Mitigation measures are site-specific and can include thicker insulation to external walls, smaller windows
with thermally efficient glass, incorporating shading through the design, enhanced ventilation and the
incorporation of soft landscaping to help mitigate the heat island effect.
Drought stress expected
to increase with extended
periods ofwaterscarcity.
There is low exposure to drought (less than two months a year) at present with
the majority of England (in particular the South East, the South West and the
Midlands) being exposed to more material drought conditions by mid-century.
Correspondingly, 92% of Berkeley’s homes could be exposed to drought
conditions for three to four months annually in the decades beyond 2050.
A significantly smaller proportion (5%) of homes could see drought conditions
for six months of the year.
The main implications are issues with water availability within our homes and
impacts on the green spaces of our developments.
Our teams integrate blue and green infrastructure into our developments using a Code of Practice
developed in conjunction with the Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust (WWT). We follow an integrated water
management approach whereby rainwater is stored and released into natural features to help manage
surface water. Attenuation offers significant opportunities to hold water for reuse.
We reduce water usage by designing homes with water efficient fixtures and fittings and incorporate
drought resilient planting in our green spaces.
Subsidence conditions
and susceptibility could
increase due towarmer
and drier summers as
well as wetterwinters.
Present day ground conditions mean that building design addresses the risk
of subsidence, with current regulations for high-rise buildings catering for
designtolerance.
Large areas in the South East and Eastern England could be exposed to
increasing subsidence conditions in 2050 and beyond, including Greater
London and the Thames Estuary due to the clay soils.
The soil conditions for 90% of Berkeley’s homes could potentially be impacted
beyond2050.
The risk of subsidence is assessed at a project level prior to land acquisition and analysed further by external
experts during detailed design to ensure appropriate measures are incorporated to mitigate risk.
Our developments in London have piled foundations which are engineered with additional factors of safety
margins to ensure the buildings are anchored deep into the ground.
For our housing developments outside of London, foundation design is agreed with specialist consultants to
ensure it is appropriate for the underlying geology and risk of subsidence.
Risk description Risk exposure and potential impact Mitigation strategy
Flood risk likely to
increase due to the
potential for coastal
flooding from sea level
rise, as well as surface
and groundwater
flooding from heavy
rainfall.
By 2050 there are no further sites exposed beyond the 6% of sites already at
risk, given the predominance of Berkeley’s portfolio in London and the flood
defences in place in the area. However, these sites could flood more often.
The main implication from flood is physical damage to completed property and
construction assets. Probabilistic loss modelling estimates that by 2050 the
physical damage from flooding under a 4°C scenario could exceed £27 million
in a severe year (i.e. 1 in 200-year return period) and £60 million in an extreme
year (i.e. a 1 in 1,000-year return period).
Risk is assessed pre-acquisition for all sites and subsequently during development planning and design if
the area falls within a flood zone. Flood risk assessments vary in extent based on potential risk and include
allowances for the effects of climate change.
Our homes are designed to mitigate the flood risk identified with measures including raising lower floor levels
and designing sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) to hold and store water in times of extreme rainfall.
Windstorm risk already
exists for all of Berkeley’s
sites and there is
no current scientific
consensus that theUK
will see an increase in
windstorm intensity.
The typical windstorm hazard could pose a moderate risk for 100% of
Berkeley’s sites. This does not reflect a change to the present day levels of
exposure, probability or potential losses of such risk.
The main impact of windstorms is physical damage to completed property
andconstruction assets.
Our developments are designed by specialist teams that select appropriate materials and fixing details
which can withstand local conditions. In respect of mid- to high-rise buildings, wind engineering is
undertaken at the pre-planning stage with designs incorporating features to resist high winds.
Wind alerts are communicated to residents with instructions such as to close windows and secure loose
objects from high level amenity spaces. Site safety guidance is sent to site teams ahead of storms and our
tower cranes are fitted with anemometers, alerting and preventing operation during high winds.
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
71 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT71 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Risk description Risk exposure and potential impact Mitigation strategy
Heat stress set to
increase with more
frequent heatwave
daysannually.
Present day heat stress is very low throughout the UK (less than five heatwave
days a year). The majority of England (in particular the South East, the South
West and the Midlands) could be exposed to more material heat stress by
mid-century with the potential for more than 20 heatwave days annually.
Correspondingly, 84% of Berkeley’s homes could be exposed to heat stress in
the decades beyond 2050.
There is the potential for overheating in our homes due to heatwave days,
exacerbated by the urban heat island effect.
Berkeley introduced a bespoke internal overheating risk assessment in 2016 to ensure that all project teams
assessed and mitigated this risk. Overheating risk is now incorporated within the 2021 Building Regulations
and, where homes are deemed to be at a higher risk, detailed dynamic thermal modelling is undertaken.
Mitigation measures are site-specific and can include thicker insulation to external walls, smaller windows
with thermally efficient glass, incorporating shading through the design, enhanced ventilation and the
incorporation of soft landscaping to help mitigate the heat island effect.
Drought stress expected
to increase with extended
periods ofwaterscarcity.
There is low exposure to drought (less than two months a year) at present with
the majority of England (in particular the South East, the South West and the
Midlands) being exposed to more material drought conditions by mid-century.
Correspondingly, 92% of Berkeley’s homes could be exposed to drought
conditions for three to four months annually in the decades beyond 2050.
A significantly smaller proportion (5%) of homes could see drought conditions
for six months of the year.
The main implications are issues with water availability within our homes and
impacts on the green spaces of our developments.
Our teams integrate blue and green infrastructure into our developments using a Code of Practice
developed in conjunction with the Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust (WWT). We follow an integrated water
management approach whereby rainwater is stored and released into natural features to help manage
surface water. Attenuation offers significant opportunities to hold water for reuse.
We reduce water usage by designing homes with water efficient fixtures and fittings and incorporate
drought resilient planting in our green spaces.
Subsidence conditions
and susceptibility could
increase due towarmer
and drier summers as
well as wetterwinters.
Present day ground conditions mean that building design addresses the risk
of subsidence, with current regulations for high-rise buildings catering for
designtolerance.
Large areas in the South East and Eastern England could be exposed to
increasing subsidence conditions in 2050 and beyond, including Greater
London and the Thames Estuary due to the clay soils.
The soil conditions for 90% of Berkeley’s homes could potentially be impacted
beyond2050.
The risk of subsidence is assessed at a project level prior to land acquisition and analysed further by external
experts during detailed design to ensure appropriate measures are incorporated to mitigate risk.
Our developments in London have piled foundations which are engineered with additional factors of safety
margins to ensure the buildings are anchored deep into the ground.
For our housing developments outside of London, foundation design is agreed with specialist consultants to
ensure it is appropriate for the underlying geology and risk of subsidence.
Risk description Risk exposure and potential impact Mitigation strategy
Flood risk likely to
increase due to the
potential for coastal
flooding from sea level
rise, as well as surface
and groundwater
flooding from heavy
rainfall.
By 2050 there are no further sites exposed beyond the 6% of sites already at
risk, given the predominance of Berkeley’s portfolio in London and the flood
defences in place in the area. However, these sites could flood more often.
The main implication from flood is physical damage to completed property and
construction assets. Probabilistic loss modelling estimates that by 2050 the
physical damage from flooding under a 4°C scenario could exceed £27 million
in a severe year (i.e. 1 in 200-year return period) and £60 million in an extreme
year (i.e. a 1 in 1,000-year return period).
Risk is assessed pre-acquisition for all sites and subsequently during development planning and design if
the area falls within a flood zone. Flood risk assessments vary in extent based on potential risk and include
allowances for the effects of climate change.
Our homes are designed to mitigate the flood risk identified with measures including raising lower floor levels
and designing sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) to hold and store water in times of extreme rainfall.
Windstorm risk already
exists for all of Berkeley’s
sites and there is
no current scientific
consensus that theUK
will see an increase in
windstorm intensity.
The typical windstorm hazard could pose a moderate risk for 100% of
Berkeley’s sites. This does not reflect a change to the present day levels of
exposure, probability or potential losses of such risk.
The main impact of windstorms is physical damage to completed property
andconstruction assets.
Our developments are designed by specialist teams that select appropriate materials and fixing details
which can withstand local conditions. In respect of mid- to high-rise buildings, wind engineering is
undertaken at the pre-planning stage with designs incorporating features to resist high winds.
Wind alerts are communicated to residents with instructions such as to close windows and secure loose
objects from high level amenity spaces. Site safety guidance is sent to site teams ahead of storms and our
tower cranes are fitted with anemometers, alerting and preventing operation during high winds.
72 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT72 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Metrics and targets
To assess and manage
performance in relation to
climate action, Berkeley
monitors and reports
on a range of metrics in
line with its operational
boundary (including joint
venture activities).
Scopes 1 and 2
emissionstarget
Berkeley’s updated SBTs validated
by the SBTi are to achieve an 86%
reduction in absolute scopes 1 and
2 (market-based) GHG emissions
by 2034 and a 90% reduction by
2045. This year, we have seen an
81% decrease compared to our
2019 baseline year.
This year we introduced a
minimum standard to always
specify biodiesel HVO
(Hydrotreated Vegetable Oil)
for directly procured diesel fuels
and moved two divisional offices
into all-electric spaces. We have
continued to back 100% of our
UK electricity consumption with
Renewable Energy Guarantees of
Origin (REGOs) fromsolar, wind
or hydro power.
Further information on our scopes
1 and 2 emissions is contained
within the Directors’ Report on
pages 158 to 159.
Scope 3 emissions target
Our newly validated SBTs are
to reduce absolute scope 3
emissions 63% by 2034 and 90%
by 2045.
Berkeley’s most significant
impacts occur across our value
chain (scope 3), predominantly
the embodied carbon of our
homes resulting from the
activities of our supply chain
(category 1: purchased goods
and services) and the energy use
by our customers in homes once
completed (category 11: use of
sold products).
These material categories
accounted for 92% of our total
scope 3 emissions this year,
which saw a 22% reduction
compared to our 2019
baselineyear.
As detailed in our Net Zero
Transition Plan roadmap, Berkeley
remains focused on taking
dedicated action at a project
level to reduce embodied carbon
emissions and deliver low carbon
homes. We note that it takes time
for our actions to influence our
reported figures, due to there
often being several years between
the planning and design phase
of a project through to legal
completions occurring.
Embodied carbon
(category1 – purchased
goods and services)
For monitoring performance
against our near-term SBT,
Berkeley currently uses a
methodology based upon spend
data to calculate the embodied
carbon of materials and services
used in the development of our
homes and places, in addition
to gathering data on contractor
purchased fuels used on our sites.
Although this practice ensures
completeness and continuity in
reporting from our baseline year,
the limitations of reporting using
a spend-based methodology
are recognised by Berkeley. We
continue to take action to move
away from this approach towards
more robust data calculations,
obtaining increasingly detailed
and material-specific data
through the completion of
embodied carbon assessments,
a Group-wide material delivery
data capture system and supply
chainengagement.
Low carbon homes
(category11 – use of
sold products)
To calculate the lifetime carbon
impact of our completed homes,
we apply the calculated Dwelling
Emission Rate (DER) from the
Standard Assessment Procedure
(SAP) across a 60-year period,
in line with industry guidance.
We do not take into account the
anticipated decarbonisation of
the UK electricity grid due to the
variablesinvolved.
Significant reductions in this area
are anticipated in the coming
years through the implementation
of the Future Homes Standard
(FHS). Emissions reporting
will also evolve as the SAP for
dwellings is replaced by the
Home Energy Model (HEM). We
continue to work with industry
and ensure our reporting reflects
the prevailing and accepted
methodology.
Industry-based metrics
Berkeley discloses industry-based
metrics derived from the SASB
Standard for Home Builders (see
pages 74 to 76).
We monitor measures
implemented across our homes
and developments to manage
the physical climate risks of
drought stress, flood and heat
stress through the reporting of
average internal water efficiency
levels,sustainable drainage
system (SuDS) installation and
the completion of overheating
riskassessments.
We remain an active member
of the Future Homes Hub’s
working group established to
develop a shared set of metrics
for the industry in relation to
sustainability performance and
seek to align our reporting
asapplicable.
Climate-related disclosures continued
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
73 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT73 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Metric Unit 2026 2025
Baseline
2019
Link to
transition
plan
Link to
climate risks and
opportunities
Reduce absolute scopes 1 and 2 GHG emissions 86% by 2034 and 90% by 2045
Absolute scopes 1 and 2
(market-based) emissions
tCO
2
e 773
A
896 3,980 Pricing of
GHG
emissions
Climate-
related
reporting
obligations
Percentage change in absolute
emissions compared to FY2019
(SBT baseline year)
% -81 -77 –
Emissions intensity for scopes 1 and 2
(market-based) emissions
tCO
2
e/ 100
sqm
0.22 0.28 1.16
Energy consumption associated
with scopes 1 and 2 emissions
MWh 22,899
A
25,745 35,681
Energy consumption from
renewablesources
% 87 87 60
Purchased electricity backed by
REGOs
% 98.1 98.2 99.1
Purchased electricity in the UK
backed byREGOs
% 100 100 100
Reduce absolute scope 3 GHG emissions 63% by 2034 and 90% by 2045
Absolute total scope 3 emissions tCO
2
e 499,107 545,756 641,839
Planning
and design
requirements
Substitution
of existing
technologies
Raw material
costs
Change in
customer
demands
Skills
availability
to deliver
low carbon
homes
Percentage change in absolute
emissions compared to FY2019 (SBT
baseline year)
% -22 -15 –
Absolute emissions for category 1:
purchased goods and services
tCO
2
e 235,385
A
265,769 352,087
Absolute emissions for category 11:
use of sold products
tCO
2
e 224,685
A
236,056 233,603
Absolute emissions for all other
scope 3 categories
tCO
2
e 39,037 43,931 56,149
Emissions intensity for
total scope 3 emissions
tCO
2
e/ 100
sqm
142 171 187
Emissions intensity for category 1:
purchased goods and services
tCO
2
e/ 100
sqm
67 83 103
Emissions intensity for category 11:
use of sold products
tCO
2
e/ 100
sqm
64 74 68
Emissions intensity for all other
scope 3 categories
tCO
2
e/ 100
sqm
11 14 16
Implement measures to manage climate risks for our developments and business
Average internal water efficiency of
completed homes
lpppd 100.9 102.2 102.6
n/a
Drought
stress
Flood
Heat stress
Change in
customer
demands
Live development sites that have
sustainable drainage systems (SuDS)
% 100 100 98
Live development sites that have
assessed overheating risk
% 92 90 –
A
2026 information has been separately subject to limited assurance by KPMG LLP. Further details of the assurance provided in 2026,
including the independent assurance report and our methodology for reporting emissions, can be found at
www.berkeleygroup.co.uk/sustainabilitydisclosures
74 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT74 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Climate-related disclosures continued
Metric Detail 2026 2025
Number of controlled lots
(IF-HB-000.A)
Lots on owned or unconditionally contracted sites as of the last
day of the reporting period (including joint venture activities)
1
.
52,763 52,714
Number of homes
delivered (IF-HB-000.B)
The number of homes delivered within the reporting period
(including joint venture activities)
1
.
4,203 4,329
Number of active selling
communities
(IF-HB-000.C)
Live development sites that have an implementable planning
consent and that are in production (including joint venture
activities).
48 50
1
Homes completed for Berkeley Living are included within the number of controlled lots as they continue to be owned by Berkeley.
Land use and ecological impacts
Number of (1) lots and
(2) homes delivered on
redevelopment sites
(IF-HB-160a.1)
Redevelopment sites are those that have been previously
developed, including the replacement or refurbishment of existing
structures, i.e. those sites considered to be brownfield land.
(1) 47,117
(89%)
(2) 3,781
(90%)
(1) 46,612
(88%)
(2) 4,001
(92%)
Number of (1) lots and (2)
homes delivered in regions
with High or Extremely
High Baseline WaterStress
(IF-HB-160a.2)
London and large areas of the South of England are identified as
having High Baseline Water Stress within the World Resources
Institute’s (WRI) Water Risk Atlas Tool. We recognise the need to
balance providing new homes in these areas with reducing their
impact on existing resources through the incorporation of water
efficient fittings and sustainable drainage systems(SuDS).
Berkeley does not have any activities in areas classified as having
Extremely High Baseline Water Stress.
(1) 48,175
(91%)
(2) 3,907
(93%)
(1) 47,411
(90%)
(2) 4,202
(97%)
Total amount of monetary
losses as a result of legal
proceedings associated
with environmental
regulations (IF-HB-160a.3)
A contribution of £125,000 has been made to the Kent Wildlife
Trust, in accordance with an enforcement undertaking accepted
by the Environment Agency in October 2025. The enforcement
undertaking related to silt discharges from a development site in
2019/20.
Berkeley took the incident very seriously and completed a
thorough review of the contributing factors, which informed
the implementation of enhancements to our risk controls. The
lessons learnt in respect of managing silt were incorporated within
Berkeley’s Sustainability Management System (SMS) procedures
and further guidance and training on surface water management
was provided to teams across the Group.
£125,000 £nil
Discussion of process to
integrate environmental
considerations into site
selection, site design,
andsite development
andconstruction
(IF-HB-160a.4)
Our Vision is supported by our Sustainability Standards and
procedures detailing Berkeley’s minimum requirements for our
day-to-day operations and our new developments. These ensure
that we have processes in place to integrate environmental
considerations throughout the development process. For example:
• Site selection: Berkeley focuses on urban brownfield regeneration,
which is inherently sustainable. Prior to land purchase, Berkeley
completes an assessment which seeks to identify all types of risks,
including those related to environmental factors, such as climate
change (e.g. flood risk), land contamination and ecology. These
assessments are site-specific, taking into account the unique
characteristics of each development.
• Site design: Our Sustainability Standards detail minimum
requirements for new developments including achieving an
internal water use of less than 105 litres per person per day and
designing for climate change adaptation.
• Site development and construction: Berkeley has dedicated
sustainability professionals within each of our operating
companies, who support project teams by providing advice and
driving environmental improvements (e.g. energy and water
efficiency). Each site has an Environmental Risk Register and
a site sustainability assessment is undertaken by our internal
sustainability team at least quarterly to monitor performance.
n/a n/a
SASB Standard for Home Builders: climate-related metrics
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
75 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Metric Detail 2026 2025
Design for resource efficiency
(1) Number of homes
that obtained a certified
residential energy
efficiency rating and (2)
average rating
(IF-HB-410a.1)
In the UK, an Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) details
a home’s energy efficiency rating on a scale ranging from
A(veryefficient) to G (inefficient).
All homes completed by Berkeley had an Energy Performance
Certificate (EPC). In the year, 96% completed homes were rated B
or above with an average energy efficiency rating of 85(B).
(1) 4,203
(100%)
(2) 85 (B)
(1) 4,329
(100%)
(2) 84 (B)
Percentage of installed
water fixtures certified to a
water efficiency standard
(IF-HB-410a.2)
The UK does not currently have water efficiency standards for
fixtures. As an alternative metric, the average internal water
efficiency of homes completed in the year is 100.9 litres per
person per day (lpppd); a 16% improvement on UK building
regulation requirements.
Berkeley’s target is to deliver homes with a maximum internal
water efficiency value of 105 lpppd and we achieve this through
the installation of water saving devices such as dual-flush toilets
and reduced flow taps.
n/a n/a
Number of homes
delivered certified to a
third-party multi-attribute
green building standard
(IF-HB-410a.3)
There is no multi-attribute green building standard specifically for
homes that is consistently applied in the UK.
All Berkeley homes are subject to UK building regulations, with
requirements covering topics such as water and energy efficiency,
ventilation and measures to limit overheating.
n/a n/a
Description of risks and
opportunities related to
incorporating resource
efficiency into home
design, and how benefits
are communicated to
customers (IF-HB-410a.4)
We design to high fabric efficiency to reduce energy demand
and install water saving fixtures and fittings. A key risk associated
with the design of energy efficient homes is the unintended
consequence of overheating and therefore we consider overall
building design and performance.
We have Sustainability Standards to communicate sustainability
with customers at all stages in the purchasing process, from initial
marketing brochures to detailed information upon completion and
handover of thehome.
n/a n/a
Climate change adaptation
Number of lots located in
100-year flood zones
(IF-HB-420a.1)
The figure disclosed includes lots in areas assigned as Flood Zone
3 by the UK Environment Agency.
Flood risk assessments are completed by external experts for
every site as part of the planning process. Development designs
take into account the results, with measures implemented to
mitigate flood risk as appropriate. These include raising lower
floor levels and designing SuDS to manage rainwater by storing
it and releasing it into well-designed natural features to help
manage surface water and reduce the impacts of flooding.
10,609
(20%)
11,902
(23%)
Description of climate
change risk exposure
analysis, degree of
systematic portfolio
exposure, and strategies
for mitigating risks
(IF-HB-420a.2)
Berkeley routinely evaluates climate-related risks and
opportunities as part of our ongoing risk assessment process.
Detailed climate scenario analysis in relation to physical risks was
completed in 2022 with this still considered to be relevant to our
operations as we continue to develop across London, Birmingham
and the South of England. Read more on pages 70 to 71.
n/a n/a
76 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
SASB Standard for Home Builders: other metrics
In addition to the climate-related metrics of SASB, Berkeley has chosen to disclose the additional sustainability
topics and accounting metrics below in line with the Home Builders Sustainability Accounting Standard.
Metric Detail 2026 2025
Workplace health and safety
(1) Total recordable
incident rate (TRIR) and
(2) fatality rate for
(a) direct employees and
(b) contract employees
(IF-HB-320a.1)
Annual Injury Incidence Rate (AIIR) per 100,000 people reported
in line with UK Health and Safety Executive (HSE) methodology.
Our combined rate for direct employees and our on-site
contractor workforce is 100 which outperforms the construction
sector average of 280 (HSE, November 2025).
There have been no work-related fatalities in the year.
(1a) 0
(1b) 138
(2a; 2b) 0
(1a) 39
(1b) 124
(2a; 2b) 0
Community impacts of new developments
Description of how
proximity and access to
infrastructure, services,
and economic centres
affect site selection and
developmentdecisions
(IF-HB-410b.1)
At Berkeley, proximity to key infrastructure and amenities is a factor
in the selection of land.
As a specialist in brownfield regeneration, many of our sites are
located within towns and cities with existing transport networks
and economic centres. We look to provide public amenities and
sustainable transport options across our developments. Of our
live development sites, 94% are incorporating community facilities
ranging from supermarkets to nurseries, with 97% completed
homes within 1 km of key amenities via safe pedestrian routes.
n/a n/a
Number of (1) lots and
(2) homes delivered on
infill sites (IF-HB-410b.2)
Infill sites are defined as vacant or underutilised lots of land,
served by existing physical installations such as roads, power lines,
sewer and water, and other infrastructure. In line with the SASB
definition, our redevelopment sites are only considered infill if
they additionally meet this criteria.
(1) 43,640
(83%)
(2) 3,297
(78%)
(1) 43,448
(82%)
(2) 3,169
(73%)
(1) Number of homes
delivered in compact
developments and
(2) average density
(IF-HB-410b.3)
The main types of compact developments delivered by Berkeley
are mixed use developments and neighbourhood developments
with communityfacilities.
(1) 4,118
(98%)
(2)
Unknown
(1) 4,234
(98%)
(2)
Unknown
Climate-related disclosures continued
Hartland Village, Fleet
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
77 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Nature-related disclosures
Berkeley is committed
to making a measurable
contribution to the
natural environment on
every development.
Our focus on brownfield-led
regeneration underpins our
approach to nature and we have
been taking action to deliver
biodiversity net gain (BNG)
across new developments since
committing to this in 2016 (see
pages 48 and 49). Building on this
long-standing leadership, we are
strengthening our understanding
of how our activities interact
with nature and looking into how
broader environmental net gain
could be achieved.
Scan the QR code
to read our detailed
nature-related disclosures
Guided by the LEAP approach
outlined by the Taskforce
on Nature-related Financial
Disclosures (TNFD), we have
undertaken a scoping exercise
to identify material impacts and
dependencies for our industry
across direct operations and
supply chain activities. To
complete this work we have
used the ENCORE database,
supplemented by the Science
Based Targets Network (SBTN)
materiality screening tool.
Key impacts detailed by these
sources include GHG emissions,
solid waste generation, water
use, pollution and land use
change; themes which align with
the results of Berkeley’s Double
Materiality Assessment and that
are actioned under our Climate &
Nature priority area of Our Vision.
This year, Berkeley partnered
with Natural England to test a
new Environmental Benefits from
Nature (EBN) tool.
The EBN tool aims to help
developers better understand
the impact of proposed land use
change on the services nature
provides within their project area.
It is designed to help extend
net gain from just biodiversity,
to reflect wider natural capital
benefits and achieve improved
environmental outcomes such as
reduced flood risk and enhanced
water and air quality.
The use of the tool across a range
of our projects has provided
insights into projected impacts
and the environmental benefits
of nature and multifunctional
land use.
Using these initial scoping
activities as a foundation, we
will continue to take action to
evolve our understanding of
nature-related dependencies,
impacts, risks and opportunities
and further align with the
recommendations of the TNFD
over time.
78 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT78 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Section 172(1) Statement
Culture
and values
The culture and values of the business are continuously considered by the Directors when discharging
their duties to ensure they are embedded into the business. Read more on pages 80 and 106 to 107.
Business model
and strategy
The Directors have collective responsibility for promoting the long-term success of the Company in a
safe and sustainable manner in order to create and enhance shareholder value. Read more on pages 16
and 17.
Risk
management
The Directors are responsible for setting and monitoring the risk appetite for the business. For more
detail of risk management see ‘How we manage risk’ on pages 80 to 93.
Stakeholder
engagement
The Board reviews and confirms its key stakeholder groups for the purposes of section 172 annually. In
2026, they were confirmed as customers, communities and local government, employees, supply chain,
Government, regulators and industry, the environment and investors. The following pages set out how
the interests of each of these key stakeholders is embedded into the long-term strategy of the business.
For more
information
Customers
see pages 42 to 43 and 114.
Communities and local government
see pages 43 to 47 and 115.
Employees
see pages 52 to 54 and 115.
Supply chain
see pages 50 to 51, 54 to 56 and 116.
Government, regulators and industry
see pages 54 to 55 and 116.
Environment
see pages 48 to 51 and 117.
Investors
see page 117.
Members of the Board as a whole
and individually are bound by their
duties under section 172(1) (a) to
(f) of the Companies Act 2006 (the
Act). In this statement, we describe
how our Directors have considered
the matters set out in section 172(1)
of the Act (section 172) when
performing their duty to promote
the success of the Company.
This engagement, both directly
and through regular reports
from individual business areas
and various functions, ensures
the Board is made aware of key
issues to enable the Directors to
comply with their legal duty under
section172.
This statement summarises
how the Company promotes its
success for the benefit of its key
stakeholder groups by having
regard to:
— the likely consequences of any
decisions in the long term;
— the need to foster the
Company’s business
relationships with suppliers,
customers and others;
— the desirability of the Company
maintaining a reputation of
high standards of business
conduct;
— the interests of the
Company’semployees;
— the impact of the Company’s
operations on the community
and environment; and
— the need to act fairly between
members of the Company.
We believe that to progress
our strategy and to deliver
substantial sustainable long-term
growth opportunities, the Board
should consider all stakeholders
relevant to a decision and satisfy
themselves that any decision
upholds our values and aligns
with Our Vision.
The Board recognises that
stakeholder engagement is
essential to understand what
matters most to our stakeholders
and the likely impact of our
keydecisions.
The following sections
demonstrate how the Directors
fulfil their duties in respect of
these obligations by addressing
in turn some of the keyareas of
focus for the Board.
Further detail of Board activity
in the year is described in the
Corporate Governance section
on pages 108 to 113.
HOMES &
CUSTOMERS
Key | Our Vision priorities
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
79 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT79 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Non-financial and Sustainability
Information Statement
The following table summarises where our non-financial information can be found in our Annual Report and
within ourpolicies available on our website.
Reporting
requirement
Where to read more in this report to understand the impact
on the business, and the outcome of applying our policies Page reference
Relevant policies in place that
govern our approach
Environmental
matters
Our Vision in action
Climate and nature-related disclosures
Our stakeholders: Environment
ESG performance
Driving growth and value
48 to 51
60 to 77
117
58
11
• Sustainability
• Climate Change
• Sustainable Specification
andProcurement
Climate-
related
financial
disclosures
Climate-related disclosures
Our Vision in action
Directors’ Report: Scopes 1 and 2 greenhouse gas
emissions and energy consumption
60 to 76
50 to 51
158 to 159
• Climate Change
• Sustainability
Employees Our Vision in action
Our stakeholders: Employees
ESG performance
52 to 54
115
59
• Employee
• Equality and Diversity
• Health, Safety and
Wellbeing
• Sexual Harassment
Respect for
human rights
Our Vision in action
Our stakeholders: Employees, Supply chain
Whistleblowing
52, 54 to 55
115 to 116
109
• Modern Slavery Statement
• Human Rights, Modern
Slavery and Child Labour
• Equality and Diversity
• Whistleblowing
• Sustainable Specification
andProcurement
Social matters Our Vision in action
The Berkeley Foundation
Our stakeholders: Customers, Communities and
local government, Employees, Supply chain
Driving growth and value
43 to 47 and
52 to 55
52 and 57
114 to 116
10 to 11
• Sustainability
• Sustainable Specification
andProcurement
• Building Safety and
QualityAssurance
Anti-bribery
and anti-
corruption
Bribery Act andAnti-Money Laundering Regulations 109 • Anti-Bribery and
Corruption
• Business Ethics
• Corporate Hospitality and
Promotional Expenditure
• Whistleblowing
• Anti-Facilitation of
TaxEvasion
• Prevention of Fraud
How we
manage risk
How we manage risk, Principal risks, Financial risks,
Risk tables
Climate-related disclosures
80 to 82 and 84
to 93
66 to 71
Business
model
Our business model
Brownfield regeneration
Driving growth and value
16 to 17
12 to 13
10 to 11
Non-financial
KPIs
Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
In addition to these non-financial KPIs, Berkeley
monitors and reports on business performance
through a host of other data, highlights and awards.
Some of these are detailed within the Our Vision
business strategy sections of this report
ESG performance
Driving growth and value
35
38 to 57
58 to 59
10 to 11
80 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
How we manage risk
Cyclical market
Berkeley’s business model
is centred on the Board’s
appreciation of the risks of the
cyclical market in which the
business operates, where market
sentiment and transaction levels
can change quickly, requiring us
to adopt a flexible approach to
our investment decisions. This
can be dependent on where the
Board believes we are within any
particular cycle.
Autonomy and values
Berkeley has autonomous,
talented and experienced teams
who embrace Berkeley’s values
in their approach. Berkeley
creates bespoke and innovative
solutions for each site which
requires experienced,
intensive management.
Resource and expertise
Berkeley must continually
assess the required investment
in its people so it is fully able
to implement its strategy in the
wider environment. Recruitment,
training and retention of resource
are fundamental to Berkeley
retaining its market leading
position and ensuring it has
highly skilled and experienced
teams who create bespoke and
innovative solutions for each of
its sites.
Operational complexity
The business model also
recognises the complexity of the
planning and delivery of the sites
Berkeley undertakes, alongside
their capital intensive nature. It
mitigates this risk by focusing its
activities in London and the South
East, recognising the importance
of relationships and local
knowledge and having highly
skilled and experienced teams
in place.
Financial strength
This translates into an approach
that, at all times through the
cycle, keeps financial risk low,
recognising the operational risks
within the business.
Through our strong financial
position we are therefore able to
take, under normal circumstances,
increased operational risk to
deliver robust risk-adjusted
returns, within the parameters
of our business model.
Culture and purpose
Berkeley’s unique culture is the
sum of its shared values, vision
and overarching sense of purpose.
Together, they have a dynamic
and energising effect on the way
the business operates, shaping
our purpose, long-term Our Vision
responsible business strategy,
brand and day-to-day behaviours.
Our culture sets the standards by
which we judge our behaviours,
products and internal processes.
Emerging risks
Berkeley faces a number of
uncertainties that have the
potential to be materially
significant to our long-term
strategy but cannot be fully defined
as a specific risk at present, and
therefore cannot be fully assessed
or managed. These emerging risks
typically have a long time horizon
and are discussed and agreed
by the Board on a regular basis.
The assessment of risk and embedding risk
management throughout Berkeley are key elements
of setting and delivering the Group’s strategy.
Risk appetite
The Board is responsible for
setting and monitoring the
risk appetite for Berkeley. Risk
appetite relates to the amount
of risk the Company may seek
or accept at any given time
when pursuing its strategic
objectives, in the context
of the prevailing operating
environment. The Board’s
approach to, and appetite for,
risk is summarised opposite.
Provision 29 of
the UK Corporate
Governance Code 2024
The Corporate Governance
Code was amended in 2024
and comes into effect for
financial years commencing
from 1 January 2026. This
requires Boards to monitor
and review the effectiveness of
risk management and internal
control frameworks.
This includes an assessment
of all material financial,
operational, reporting and
compliance controls and
requires Boards to make
disclosures within the Annual
Report as to the effectiveness
of these controls at the balance
sheet date.
Berkeley has undertaken
detailed work via a top-down
and bottom-up approach to
review its Principal Risks and
map these to the material
controls that mitigate
these risks. Detailed testing
procedures have been
undertaken as part of a full
dry run prior to the year
of implementation.
Control testing will be
undertaken throughout the
year and will be reported
on periodically to both the
Audit Committee and Board,
culminating in detailed
reporting of testing results,
enabling the Board to make
a declaration of effectiveness
as at 30 April 2027.
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
81 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Principal risks
In accordance with
provisions of the 2024 UK
Corporate Governance Code,
the Directors have carried
out a robust assessment
of the emerging and
principal risks facing the
Group, including those that
would threaten its business
model, future performance,
solvency or liquidity. There
are also areas of our existing
principal risks that are
evolving over time.
The Group’s risk appetite is reviewed
annually and approved by the Board.
This review guides the actions we take
to implement our strategy.
The last year has seen a
continuation of the market
uncertainty and volatility in the
operating environment which has
been prevalent over recent years,
exacerbated by the recent conflict in
Iran and the wider Middle East and an
uncertain politicalenvironment.
Berkeley continues to evolve its
strategy to position the business
appropriately for the continued
challenges in the market, geopolitical
uncertainty and wider risk landscape.
Our risk appetite will remain dynamic
whilst mindful of the cyclical nature
of our industry and the risks and
opportunities this presents.
The principal operating risks and
our approach to mitigating them
are described in more detail on
pages 84 to 93.
Risk management framework
Our approach to risk management combines a top-down
strategic review and feedback of risks by the Board,
coupled with a bottom-up review and reporting of risk by
each operating business.
Our top-down approach
Our bottom-up approach
Board
The Board takes overall responsibility for risk
management, and the assessment of risk. Embedding risk
management into the business is a key element of setting
and delivering our strategy.
The top-down assessment of risk by the Board includes
a review of the external environment in which Berkeley
operates, which complements the deep seated knowledge
of the industry and operations by the Executive Committee
members. This takes into account the likelihood and impact
of risks, whether pre-existing or emerging, which may
materialise in the short or longer term.
Emerging risks are also considered at each Board meeting
and are then fed down to the operating businesses for
further review and consideration, if applicable.
Audit Committee
The Audit Committee is responsible for monitoring and
reviewing the effectiveness of the risk management and
internal control framework on behalf of the Board. The work
of the Audit Committee is further explained on pages 124
to127.
Executive Committee
Operational risk is documented within Divisional risk
registers, which are then consolidated with the wider
strategic risks facing the Group, to form the basis of
the Executive Committee’s Principal Risks assessment.
The Principal Risks are regularly reviewed and actively
managed by the Executive Committee.
Operational Management
A fundamental principle of the operating structure of
the Group is that the prime responsibility for assessing,
managing and monitoring the majority of the risks rests
with operational management, thus ensuring that risk
management is embedded in our day-to-day operations.
All Employees
All employees are encouraged to be alert to risks
associated with the activities they perform and to report
issues and suggest alternative approaches as appropriate.
82 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Financial risks
Exposure to
financialrisks
Liquidity risk is the principal
Financial Risk that Berkeley
is exposed to, primarily
through Funding Liquidity
Risk and Market Liquidity
Risk.
Funding liquidity risk
The risk that the funding
required for the Group to
pursue its activities may
not be available.
Market liquidity risk
— The risk that Group
financing activities are
affected by fluctuations in
market interest rates.
— The risk that
counterparties (mainly
customers) will default
on their contractual
obligations, resulting in a
loss to the Group.
Other financial risks
The Group’s exposure to
credit risk is comprised of
cash and cash equivalents,
loans to joint ventures and
trade and other receivables.
Berkeley has no significant
exposure to currency risk
as it contracts all of its
sales and the vast majority
of its purchases in sterling.
However, it does recognise
that its credit risk includes
receivables from customers
in a range of jurisdictions
who are themselves
exposed to currency risk in
contracting in sterling.
Management of financial risks
Berkeley adopts a prudent approach
to managing these financial risks.
Treasury policy and central overview
The Board approves treasury policy and senior management
control day-to-day operations. Relationships with banks
and cash management are coordinated centrally as a Group
function. The treasury policy is intended to maintain an
appropriate capital structure to manage the financial risks
identified and provide the right platform for the business to
manage its operating risks.
Forward sales
Berkeley’s approach to forward selling new homes to
customers provides good visibility over future cash flows, as
expressed in cash due on forward sales which stands at £1.0
billion at 30 April 2026. It also helps mitigate market credit
risk by virtue of customers’ deposits held from the point of
unconditional exchange of contracts with customers.
Low gearing
The Group is currently financing its operations through
shareholder equity, supported by £363 million of net cash
on the Balance Sheet and debt facilities. This in turn has
mitigated its current exposure to interest rate risk.
Land holdings
By investing in land at the right point in the cycle, holding
a clear development pipeline in our land holdings and
continually optimising our existing holdings, we are not
under pressure to buy new land when it would be wrong for
the long-term returns for the business.
Headroom provided by bank facilities
The Group has £800 million of committed credit facilities
maturing in February 2029. This comprises a green term
loan of £260 million and the Revolving Credit Facility (RCF)
of £540 million. In addition, the Group has listed debt in the
form of Green Bonds to the value of £400 million maturing
in August 2031.
After year end, the Group extended the banking facilities
to £1.0 billion, comprising a £240 million Term Loan and a
£760 million RCF. See Note 2.27 on page 218.
Berkeley has a strong working partnership with the six
banks that provide the facilities and this is key to Berkeley’s
approach to mitigating liquidity risk.
Detailed appraisal of spending commitments
A culture which prioritises an understanding of the impact
of all decisions on the Group’s spending commitments and
hence its Balance Sheet, alongside weekly and monthly
reviews of cash flow forecasts at operating company,
divisional and Group levels, recognises that cash flow
management is central to the continued success of Berkeley.
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
83 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Viability Statement
In accordance with
code provision 31 of the
2024 revision of the UK
Corporate Governance
Code, the Directors have
assessed the viability of
the Group.
Berkeley is a unique asset-focused
development business that seeks
to manage risk and generate
value through market cycles.
Berkeley’s approach centres on
using its development expertise
to maximise the returns from
our large-scale assets, creating
the right development solution
for each site. Financial strength
underpins this approach and is
a fundamental risk management
principle, evident in:
— The scale of the land holdings
and focus on long-term
brownfield regeneration
developments which have
the scope for value creation
through the market cycle.
— A strong forward planning
position which provides
visibility on delivery and
mitigates regulatory risk in
thenear term.
— The cash due on forward
sales which underpins near-
term delivery and cash flows,
alongside a strong balance
sheet with net cash and
liquidity provided through
debt capacity.
The Group’s net cash of £363
million at 30 April 2026 which,
coupled with its debt capacity of
£1,200 million, ensures Berkeley
has available liquidity of over
£1,500 million. The debt capacity
comprises £400 million of listed
unsecured Green Bonds which
mature in August 2031, supported
by Fitch Ratings Ltd’s senior
unsecured investment grade
rating of BBB- (Stable Outlook),
and bank facilities of £800 million.
Read more on our Going Concern
on page 160
Prince of Wales Drive, Wandsworth
Thebank facilities are in place
untilFebruary2029. After year
end, the Group extended the
banking facilities to £1.0 billion,
comprising a £240 million Term
Loan and a £760 million RCF. See
Note 2.27 on page 218.
Cash due on forward sales are
resilient in the prevailing market
conditions at £1,006 million, while
the land holdings comprise an
estimated £6.4 billion of future
gross margin across 53,000
futurehomes.
Berkeley’s approach to risk
management and its risk appetite
are set out on pages 80 to 93 of
the Strategic Report. Individual
development site cash flow
forecasts, which are used to
prepare the Group’s consolidated
cash flow forecast, take account
of operational circumstances
and risks. The Group’s cash flow
forecast includes appropriate
allowances for discretionary
investment and the quantum and
timing of this is in turn subject
to the delivery of the site cash
flows and broader strategy for
the Group.
The viability assessment
envisages a severe but
plausible deterioration in
the economic outlook which
impacts the site level cash flows,
principally through lower sales
transactionvolumes and pricing.
In response to such a scenario,
Berkeley’s response could
comprise a myriad of mitigating
combinations of actions, but the
key principles modelled include:
— Production effort re-focused
to buildings with forward sales
enabling these to be collected.
— Cautious approach to new WIP
investment as new buildings
or sites are placed on hold or
slowed, whilst all discretionary
new land investment
issuspended.
— Sales transaction levels and
pricing reduce considerably as
economic conditions decline.
— Shareholder returns are delayed.
The Directors have made this
viability assessment over a three-
year period from 1 May 2026 to
30 April 2029 principally to
align with the period covered
by Berkeley’s forward sales as
these are the key area of focus
for the business underthe
viabilityassessment.
Based on the assessment, the
Directors confirm that they have
a reasonable expectation that the
Group will be able to continue in
operation and meet its liabilities as
they fall due over the three-year
period commencing 1 May 2026.
84 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Risk tables
Risk description and impact Approach to mitigating risk
Link
to Our
Vision
Residual
risk rating
Likelihood
change
Impact
change
during
year Commentary and developments if any during the year
Economic
outlook
As a property developer, Berkeley’s
business is sensitive to wider economic
factors such as changes in interest
rates, employment levels and general
consumer confidence.
Some customers are also sensitive to
changes in the sterling exchange rate in
terms of their buying decisions or ability
to meet their obligations under contracts.
Changes to economic conditions in the
UK, Europe and worldwide may lead to a
reduction in demand for housing which
could impact on the Group’s ability to
deliver its corporate strategy.
Recognition that Berkeley operates in a cyclical
market is central to our strategy and maintaining
a strong financial position is fundamental to our
business model and protects us against adverse
changes in economic conditions.
Land investment in all market conditions is carefully
targeted and underpinned by demand fundamentals
and a solid viability case.
Levels of committed expenditure are carefully
monitored against forward sales secured, cash levels
and headroom against our available bank facilities,
with the objective of minimising financial risk
to mitigate the operating risks of delivery in
uncertain markets.
Production programmes are continually assessed,
depending upon market conditions. The business
is committed to operating at an optimal size, with
a strong Balance Sheet, through autonomous
businesses to maintain the flexibility to react swiftly,
when necessary, to changes in market conditions.
–
High Geopolitical and macroeconomic volatility continue to affect the operating
environment. Positive sentiment from early 2026 has been reversed following the
start of the Iran and wider Middle East conflict, with significant increases to oil and
commodity prices leading to expected inflation in energy, food and consumables.
Whilst there have been recent signs of improvement in the UK’s growth forecasts, these
remain at risk should the current conflict persist.
Interest rates fell to 3.75% during the first nine months of the year, but are not expected
to fall now for some time given the heightened global economic uncertainty and the
need to manage inflation.
Read more on
pages 20 to 30
Political
outlook
Significant political events in the UK
and overseas may impact Berkeley’s
business through, for example, supply
chain disruption or the reluctance of
customers to make purchase decisions
due to political uncertainty and,
subsequently, policies and regulations
may be introduced that directly impact
our business model.
Whilst we cannot directly influence political events,
the risks are taken into account when setting our
business strategy and operating model. In addition,
we actively engage in the debate on policy decisions.
– High The political risk remains heightened by geopolitical tensions, exacerbated by the
recent conflict in Iran and the wider Middle East, and political uncertainty in the UK,
with politics becoming increasingly polarised and a Government under increased
pressure even before the recent local election results.
These issues are having a significant impact on the Government’s mission for growth
and delivering 1.5 million new homes over the lifetime of this Parliament, with the focus
shifting to other issues including cost of living and Government spending.
Consumer confidence is unlikely to improve without greater economic and
political stability.
Read more on
pages 20 to 30
Regulation
and reporting
Adverse changes to Government policy,
the law, and other corporate obligations
over areas such as taxation, design
requirements and the environment could
restrict the ability of the Group to deliver
its strategy.
Failure to comply with laws and
regulations could expose the Group to
penalties and reputational damage.
Berkeley is primarily focused geographically on
London, Birmingham and the South East of England,
which limits our risk when understanding and
determining the impact of new regulation across
multiple locations and jurisdictions.
The effects of changes to Government policies at all
levels are closely monitored by operating businesses
and the Board, and Berkeley regularly engages
with policymakers to ensure wider implications of
proposals are clearly understood.
Berkeley’s experienced teams are well placed
to interpret and implement new regulations
at the appropriate time through direct lines of
communication across the Group, with support from
internal and external legal advisors.
–
High Housing and fire safety remain high on the agendas of the Government and the main
political parties, with the sector continuing to face regulation and scrutiny.
We continue to actively monitor and manage the uncertainty and delays experienced
across the industry from the Gateway approval process under the Building Safety
Regulator (BSR), and in particular the risk of delays to our build programmes arising
from the determination of Gateway 2 applications for our Higher Risk Buildings.
Whilst we have seen some improvement during the year from both our intensive
engagement and changes to the BSR leadership, significant improvement is required to
provide the certainty needed for ongoing investment.
Read more on
pages 20 to 30, 54 to 55 and 116
HOMES &
CUSTOMERS
Key | Our Vision priorities
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
85 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Risk description and impact Approach to mitigating risk
Link
to Our
Vision
Residual
risk rating
Likelihood
change
Impact
change
during
year Commentary and developments if any during the year
Economic
outlook
As a property developer, Berkeley’s
business is sensitive to wider economic
factors such as changes in interest
rates, employment levels and general
consumer confidence.
Some customers are also sensitive to
changes in the sterling exchange rate in
terms of their buying decisions or ability
to meet their obligations under contracts.
Changes to economic conditions in the
UK, Europe and worldwide may lead to a
reduction in demand for housing which
could impact on the Group’s ability to
deliver its corporate strategy.
Recognition that Berkeley operates in a cyclical
market is central to our strategy and maintaining
a strong financial position is fundamental to our
business model and protects us against adverse
changes in economic conditions.
Land investment in all market conditions is carefully
targeted and underpinned by demand fundamentals
and a solid viability case.
Levels of committed expenditure are carefully
monitored against forward sales secured, cash levels
and headroom against our available bank facilities,
with the objective of minimising financial risk
to mitigate the operating risks of delivery in
uncertain markets.
Production programmes are continually assessed,
depending upon market conditions. The business
is committed to operating at an optimal size, with
a strong Balance Sheet, through autonomous
businesses to maintain the flexibility to react swiftly,
when necessary, to changes in market conditions.
–
High Geopolitical and macroeconomic volatility continue to affect the operating
environment. Positive sentiment from early 2026 has been reversed following the
start of the Iran and wider Middle East conflict, with significant increases to oil and
commodity prices leading to expected inflation in energy, food and consumables.
Whilst there have been recent signs of improvement in the UK’s growth forecasts, these
remain at risk should the current conflict persist.
Interest rates fell to 3.75% during the first nine months of the year, but are not expected
to fall now for some time given the heightened global economic uncertainty and the
need to manage inflation.
Read more on
pages 20 to 30
Political
outlook
Significant political events in the UK
and overseas may impact Berkeley’s
business through, for example, supply
chain disruption or the reluctance of
customers to make purchase decisions
due to political uncertainty and,
subsequently, policies and regulations
may be introduced that directly impact
our business model.
Whilst we cannot directly influence political events,
the risks are taken into account when setting our
business strategy and operating model. In addition,
we actively engage in the debate on policy decisions.
– High The political risk remains heightened by geopolitical tensions, exacerbated by the
recent conflict in Iran and the wider Middle East, and political uncertainty in the UK,
with politics becoming increasingly polarised and a Government under increased
pressure even before the recent local election results.
These issues are having a significant impact on the Government’s mission for growth
and delivering 1.5 million new homes over the lifetime of this Parliament, with the focus
shifting to other issues including cost of living and Government spending.
Consumer confidence is unlikely to improve without greater economic and
political stability.
Read more on
pages 20 to 30
Regulation
and reporting
Adverse changes to Government policy,
the law, and other corporate obligations
over areas such as taxation, design
requirements and the environment could
restrict the ability of the Group to deliver
its strategy.
Failure to comply with laws and
regulations could expose the Group to
penalties and reputational damage.
Berkeley is primarily focused geographically on
London, Birmingham and the South East of England,
which limits our risk when understanding and
determining the impact of new regulation across
multiple locations and jurisdictions.
The effects of changes to Government policies at all
levels are closely monitored by operating businesses
and the Board, and Berkeley regularly engages
with policymakers to ensure wider implications of
proposals are clearly understood.
Berkeley’s experienced teams are well placed
to interpret and implement new regulations
at the appropriate time through direct lines of
communication across the Group, with support from
internal and external legal advisors.
–
High Housing and fire safety remain high on the agendas of the Government and the main
political parties, with the sector continuing to face regulation and scrutiny.
We continue to actively monitor and manage the uncertainty and delays experienced
across the industry from the Gateway approval process under the Building Safety
Regulator (BSR), and in particular the risk of delays to our build programmes arising
from the determination of Gateway 2 applications for our Higher Risk Buildings.
Whilst we have seen some improvement during the year from both our intensive
engagement and changes to the BSR leadership, significant improvement is required to
provide the certainty needed for ongoing investment.
Read more on
pages 20 to 30, 54 to 55 and 116
Key | Risk
Increased risk No change Decreased risk
86 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Risk description and impact Approach to mitigating risk
Link
to Our
Vision
Residual
risk rating
Likelihood
change
Impact
change
during
year Commentary and developments if any during the year
Land
availability
and planning
An inability to source suitable land to
maintain the Group’s land holdings
at appropriate margins in a highly
competitive market could impact on
the Group’s ability to deliver its
corporate strategy.
Delays or refusals in obtaining
commercially viable planning permissions
could result in the Group being unable
to develop its land holdings. The current
complex and evolving nature of planning
policies amplifies the risk.
This could have a direct impact on the
Group’s ability to deliver its product and
on its profitability.
Understanding the markets in which we operate is
central to Berkeley’s strategy and, consequently,
land acquisition is primarily focused on our core
markets of London, Birmingham and the South East
of England, markets in which we believe the demand
fundamentals are strong.
Berkeley has experienced land and planning teams
with strong market knowledge which gives us
confidence to buy land without an implementable
planning consent and, with an understanding of local
stakeholders’ needs, positions Berkeley with the best
chance of securing a viable planning consent.
Full detailed planning and risk assessments are
performed and monitored for each site without
planning permission and the planning status of all
sites is reviewed at both monthly divisional Board
meetings and Main Board meetings.
The Group works closely with local communities
in respect of planning proposals and maintains
strong relationships with local authorities and
planning officers.
Berkeley’s land holdings mean that it has the land
and planning consents in place for its business plan
requirements and can therefore always acquire land at
the right time in the cycle.
Medium The Group’s strategy is to focus on protecting and enhancing the value of its land
holdings through a combination of acquiring new sites, enhancing the value of existing
sites and bringing sites through the strategic pipeline of long-term options.
Investment decisions continue to be affected by the uncertainty in the political and
economic outlook, as well as complexities in the planning system.
Further to acquiring two sites in the first half of the year, Berkeley is not proposing to
acquire any material new land until the adverse conditions created by the increases in
tax and regulatory burden on residential development are eased.
We have made good progress on new and revised planning consents over the course
of the year, with more than 40 planning amendments agreed to existing consents for
additional homes. However, challenges remain over obtaining consents for viable and
implementable applications.
Our focus is on applying the principles of the new ‘Homes for London’ package to our
sites to provide the certainty required to bring forward our long-term regeneration sites
at returns commensurate with the development risk.
Read more on
pages 20 to 30 and 115
Attracting
and retaining
talented
people
An inability to attract, develop, motivate
and retain talented employees could
have an impact on the Group’s ability to
deliver its strategic priorities.
Failure to consider the retention and
succession of key management could
result in a loss of knowledge and
competitive advantage.
Our approach to attracting and retaining talent is
supported by our deeply embedded values. The
People and Culture priority within Our Vision is
designed to help recruit and retain a high calibre work
force, by cultivating an environment where people feel
supported and empowered.
We have a dedicated People team working across
Group and our autonomous businesses providing
expertise and shaping our strategy in this area, and
key representatives meet regularly as part of the
Group People Committee.
Succession planning is regularly reviewed at both
divisional and Main Board level. Close relationships
and dialogue are maintained with key personnel.
Remuneration packages are benchmarked against the
industry to ensure they remain competitive.
Medium The motivation, retention and progression of our people remains fundamental to the
delivery of our strategy.
We continue to take action on EDI to create a workplace that is fair, inclusive and
respectful, where everyone feels safe and supported, able to achieve their maximum
potential and be part of an exciting and rewarding industry.
The Group continues to have a stable senior management team and despite the normal
pressure of people retention, overall retention rates have remained relatively stable
during the year, with a continued focus on talent management, career progression
opportunities, training, benefits, health and wellbeing initiatives, and agile working.
Read more on
pages 52 and 115
Risk tables continued
HOMES &
CUSTOMERS
Key | Our Vision priorities
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
87 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Risk description and impact Approach to mitigating risk
Link
to Our
Vision
Residual
risk rating
Likelihood
change
Impact
change
during
year Commentary and developments if any during the year
Land
availability
and planning
An inability to source suitable land to
maintain the Group’s land holdings
at appropriate margins in a highly
competitive market could impact on
the Group’s ability to deliver its
corporate strategy.
Delays or refusals in obtaining
commercially viable planning permissions
could result in the Group being unable
to develop its land holdings. The current
complex and evolving nature of planning
policies amplifies the risk.
This could have a direct impact on the
Group’s ability to deliver its product and
on its profitability.
Understanding the markets in which we operate is
central to Berkeley’s strategy and, consequently,
land acquisition is primarily focused on our core
markets of London, Birmingham and the South East
of England, markets in which we believe the demand
fundamentals are strong.
Berkeley has experienced land and planning teams
with strong market knowledge which gives us
confidence to buy land without an implementable
planning consent and, with an understanding of local
stakeholders’ needs, positions Berkeley with the best
chance of securing a viable planning consent.
Full detailed planning and risk assessments are
performed and monitored for each site without
planning permission and the planning status of all
sites is reviewed at both monthly divisional Board
meetings and Main Board meetings.
The Group works closely with local communities
in respect of planning proposals and maintains
strong relationships with local authorities and
planning officers.
Berkeley’s land holdings mean that it has the land
and planning consents in place for its business plan
requirements and can therefore always acquire land at
the right time in the cycle.
Medium The Group’s strategy is to focus on protecting and enhancing the value of its land
holdings through a combination of acquiring new sites, enhancing the value of existing
sites and bringing sites through the strategic pipeline of long-term options.
Investment decisions continue to be affected by the uncertainty in the political and
economic outlook, as well as complexities in the planning system.
Further to acquiring two sites in the first half of the year, Berkeley is not proposing to
acquire any material new land until the adverse conditions created by the increases in
tax and regulatory burden on residential development are eased.
We have made good progress on new and revised planning consents over the course
of the year, with more than 40 planning amendments agreed to existing consents for
additional homes. However, challenges remain over obtaining consents for viable and
implementable applications.
Our focus is on applying the principles of the new ‘Homes for London’ package to our
sites to provide the certainty required to bring forward our long-term regeneration sites
at returns commensurate with the development risk.
Read more on
pages 20 to 30 and 115
Attracting
and retaining
talented
people
An inability to attract, develop, motivate
and retain talented employees could
have an impact on the Group’s ability to
deliver its strategic priorities.
Failure to consider the retention and
succession of key management could
result in a loss of knowledge and
competitive advantage.
Our approach to attracting and retaining talent is
supported by our deeply embedded values. The
People and Culture priority within Our Vision is
designed to help recruit and retain a high calibre work
force, by cultivating an environment where people feel
supported and empowered.
We have a dedicated People team working across
Group and our autonomous businesses providing
expertise and shaping our strategy in this area, and
key representatives meet regularly as part of the
Group People Committee.
Succession planning is regularly reviewed at both
divisional and Main Board level. Close relationships
and dialogue are maintained with key personnel.
Remuneration packages are benchmarked against the
industry to ensure they remain competitive.
Medium The motivation, retention and progression of our people remains fundamental to the
delivery of our strategy.
We continue to take action on EDI to create a workplace that is fair, inclusive and
respectful, where everyone feels safe and supported, able to achieve their maximum
potential and be part of an exciting and rewarding industry.
The Group continues to have a stable senior management team and despite the normal
pressure of people retention, overall retention rates have remained relatively stable
during the year, with a continued focus on talent management, career progression
opportunities, training, benefits, health and wellbeing initiatives, and agile working.
Read more on
pages 52 and 115
Key | Risk
Increased risk No change Decreased risk
88 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Risk description and impact Approach to mitigating risk
Link
to Our
Vision
Residual
risk rating
Likelihood
change
Impact
change
during
year Commentary and developments if any during the year
Sales
demand and
mortgage
availability
An inability to match supply to demand
in terms of product, location and price
could result in missed sales targets and/
or high levels of completed stock which
in turn could impact on the Group’s
ability to deliver its corporate strategy.
This may be compounded by an inability
of customers to secure sufficient
mortgage finance now or in the future
which could have a direct impact on the
Group’s transaction levels.
The Group has experienced sales teams both
in the UK and within our overseas sales offices,
supplemented by market-leading agents.
Detailed market demand assessments are undertaken
before site acquisition and regularly during delivery to
ensure that supply is matched to demand.
Design, product type and quality are all assessed on
a site-by-site basis to ensure they meet the target
market and customer aspirations in that location.
Berkeley’s broad product mix and customer base
reduces the reliance on mortgage availability across
its portfolio.
The Group’s ability to forward sell reduces the risk
of the development cycle where possible, thereby
justifying and underpinning the financial investment in
each of the Group’s sites.
Deposits are taken on all sales to mitigate the financial
impact in the event that sales do not complete due to
a lack of mortgage availability.
Completed stock levels are reviewed regularly.
High Geopolitical events and macroeconomic uncertainty during 2025/26 has had a
significant impact on consumer confidence and transaction levels.
During the first half of the year uncertainty leading up to the budget at the end of 2025
subdued sales volumes, but customer interest as evidenced by the level of enquiries
and leads remained positive.
The first two months of 2026 had begun to show signs of a modest recovery, but the
Iran conflict and wider instability in the Middle East has significantly impacted the
potential for future interest rate cuts and a near-term market recovery.
Cash due on private forward sales was £1.0 billion at 30 April 2026, which has
moderated through a combination of ongoing delivery and the prevailing sales rates.
70% of required sales for 2026/27 are already secured.
We continue to make strong progress on our Build to Rent business, Berkeley Living,
with the first building now in occupation and two further buildings completing shortly.
Despite three further reductions in the base rate earlier in the year to 3.75%, the
geopolitical uncertainty in early 2026 has reduced the likelihood for any further
reductions in the near term and created more volatility for mortgage rates. There are
some signs that the rises seen post the start of the conflict are starting to reverse.
Read more on
page 22, 28 to 30, 42 to 43 and 114
Liquidity and
financing
Reduced availability of the external
financing required by the Group to
pursue its activities and meet
its liabilities.
Failure to manage working capital may
constrain the growth of the business and
ability to execute the business plan.
The Board approves treasury policy and senior
management controls day-to-day operations.
Relationships with banks and cash management are
coordinated centrally as a Group function.
The treasury policy is intended to maintain an
appropriate capital structure to manage the Group’s
financial risks and provide the right platform for the
business to manage its operating risks.
Cash flow management is central to the continued
success of Berkeley. There is a culture which prioritises
an understanding of the impact of all decisions on the
Group’s spending commitments and hence its Balance
Sheet, alongside weekly and monthly reviews of cash
flow forecasts at operating company, divisional and
Group levels.
–
Low The Group had net cash of £363 million at 30 April 2026, giving the Group circa
£1.6 billion of liquidity when combined with bank facilities.
The Group has £800 million of committed credit facilities maturing in February 2029.
This comprises a green term loan of £260 million and the revolving credit facility of
£540 million. In addition, the Group has listed debt in the form of Green Bonds to the
value of £400 million maturing in August 2031.
After year end, the Group extended the banking facilities to £1.0 billion, comprising a
£240 million Term Loan and a £760 million RCF. See Note 2.27 on page 218.
Berkeley has a strong working partnership with the six banks that provide the facilities
which is key to Berkeley’s approach to mitigating liquidity risk.
Read more on
pages 33 and 213
Risk tables continued
HOMES &
CUSTOMERS
Key | Our Vision priorities
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
89 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Risk description and impact Approach to mitigating risk
Link
to Our
Vision
Residual
risk rating
Likelihood
change
Impact
change
during
year Commentary and developments if any during the year
Sales
demand and
mortgage
availability
An inability to match supply to demand
in terms of product, location and price
could result in missed sales targets and/
or high levels of completed stock which
in turn could impact on the Group’s
ability to deliver its corporate strategy.
This may be compounded by an inability
of customers to secure sufficient
mortgage finance now or in the future
which could have a direct impact on the
Group’s transaction levels.
The Group has experienced sales teams both
in the UK and within our overseas sales offices,
supplemented by market-leading agents.
Detailed market demand assessments are undertaken
before site acquisition and regularly during delivery to
ensure that supply is matched to demand.
Design, product type and quality are all assessed on
a site-by-site basis to ensure they meet the target
market and customer aspirations in that location.
Berkeley’s broad product mix and customer base
reduces the reliance on mortgage availability across
its portfolio.
The Group’s ability to forward sell reduces the risk
of the development cycle where possible, thereby
justifying and underpinning the financial investment in
each of the Group’s sites.
Deposits are taken on all sales to mitigate the financial
impact in the event that sales do not complete due to
a lack of mortgage availability.
Completed stock levels are reviewed regularly.
High Geopolitical events and macroeconomic uncertainty during 2025/26 has had a
significant impact on consumer confidence and transaction levels.
During the first half of the year uncertainty leading up to the budget at the end of 2025
subdued sales volumes, but customer interest as evidenced by the level of enquiries
and leads remained positive.
The first two months of 2026 had begun to show signs of a modest recovery, but the
Iran conflict and wider instability in the Middle East has significantly impacted the
potential for future interest rate cuts and a near-term market recovery.
Cash due on private forward sales was £1.0 billion at 30 April 2026, which has
moderated through a combination of ongoing delivery and the prevailing sales rates.
70% of required sales for 2026/27 are already secured.
We continue to make strong progress on our Build to Rent business, Berkeley Living,
with the first building now in occupation and two further buildings completing shortly.
Despite three further reductions in the base rate earlier in the year to 3.75%, the
geopolitical uncertainty in early 2026 has reduced the likelihood for any further
reductions in the near term and created more volatility for mortgage rates. There are
some signs that the rises seen post the start of the conflict are starting to reverse.
Read more on
page 22, 28 to 30, 42 to 43 and 114
Liquidity and
financing
Reduced availability of the external
financing required by the Group to
pursue its activities and meet
its liabilities.
Failure to manage working capital may
constrain the growth of the business and
ability to execute the business plan.
The Board approves treasury policy and senior
management controls day-to-day operations.
Relationships with banks and cash management are
coordinated centrally as a Group function.
The treasury policy is intended to maintain an
appropriate capital structure to manage the Group’s
financial risks and provide the right platform for the
business to manage its operating risks.
Cash flow management is central to the continued
success of Berkeley. There is a culture which prioritises
an understanding of the impact of all decisions on the
Group’s spending commitments and hence its Balance
Sheet, alongside weekly and monthly reviews of cash
flow forecasts at operating company, divisional and
Group levels.
–
Low The Group had net cash of £363 million at 30 April 2026, giving the Group circa
£1.6 billion of liquidity when combined with bank facilities.
The Group has £800 million of committed credit facilities maturing in February 2029.
This comprises a green term loan of £260 million and the revolving credit facility of
£540 million. In addition, the Group has listed debt in the form of Green Bonds to the
value of £400 million maturing in August 2031.
After year end, the Group extended the banking facilities to £1.0 billion, comprising a
£240 million Term Loan and a £760 million RCF. See Note 2.27 on page 218.
Berkeley has a strong working partnership with the six banks that provide the facilities
which is key to Berkeley’s approach to mitigating liquidity risk.
Read more on
pages 33 and 213
Key | Risk
Increased risk No change Decreased risk
90 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Risk tables continued
Risk description and impact Approach to mitigating risk
Link
to Our
Vision
Residual
risk rating
Likelihood
change
Impact
change
during
year Commentary and developments if any during the year
Sustainability
and climate
change
Berkeley is aware of the environmental
and social impact of the homes and
places that it builds, both throughout
the development process and during
occupation and use by customers and
the wider community.
Failure to address sustainability issues
could affect the Group’s ability to
acquire land, gain planning permission,
manage sites effectively and respond
to increasing customer demands for
sustainable homes and communities.
The transition to a lower carbon
economy and the physical effects of
temperature changes could particularly
have wide ranging impacts on Berkeley.
Our approach to sustainability is integrated into our
responsible business strategy, Our Vision.
Sustainability Standards are set at a Group level and
set out the minimum Berkeley requirements for new
developments and the operation of our construction
sites, divisional offices and sales suites. These are
supported by more detailed procedures within our
Sustainability Management System, including a
requirement for an Environmental Risk Register for
each site and the completion of at least quarterly
on-site sustainability assessments by our internal
sustainability professionals.
Our science-based targets (SBTs) and Net Zero
Transition Plan help drive action to reduce emissions
from our direct activities and our value chain, with
collaboration a key focus. We look to build homes
and developments that are resilient to climate
change, including the incorporation of nature-based
sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) and measures to
reduce overheating risks.
Read more about our mitigation actions
for key risks identified through climate
scenario analysis on
pages 66 to 71
Medium Berkeley monitors and takes action to ensure readiness with evolving regulation. The
launch of the Future Homes Standard in March 2026 has provided certainty around
the technical requirements and timelines for delivering energy efficient and low carbon
new homes. Whilst we have been preparing for the changes for some time, the revised
approved document Part L will have cost and technical implications for some sites.
Long-term stewardship of biodiversity net gain (BNG) has been a key area of
discussion with our managing agents and we responded to the UK Government’s
consultation on improving BNG implementation for minor, medium and brownfield
development. Recognising expected amendments to UK Listing Rules to reference
UK Sustainability Reporting Standards (UK SRS), Berkeley has completed an updated
materiality assessment.
In September 2025, we achieved validation of our net zero target and updated
near-term SBTs across scopes 1, 2 and 3. Following this, a Net Zero Transition Plan
was published, detailing a 20-year roadmap of planned decarbonisation milestones
and actions.
Transparency and action has led to Berkeley achieving an ‘A’ rating from CDP for both
its climate change and water security disclosures. We have also been named a CDP
Supplier Engagement Leader.
Read more on
pages 44 to 51, 58 to 77, 117 and 157 to 159
Health
and safety
Berkeley’s operations have a direct
impact on the health and safety of its
people, contractors and members of
the public.
A lack of adequate procedures and
systems to reduce the dangers inherent
in the construction process increases
the risk of accidents or site-related
catastrophes, including fire and flood,
which could result in serious injury or loss
of life, or impact the business through
financial penalties or disruption
to operations.
Berkeley considers this to be an area of critical
importance. Berkeley’s health and safety strategy is
set by the Board. Dedicated health and safety teams
are in place in each division and at Head Office.
Procedures, training and reporting are all regularly
reviewed to maintain high standards and ensure that
comprehensive accident investigation procedures are
in place. Insurance is held to cover the risks inherent in
large-scale construction projects.
The Group continues to implement initiatives to
improve health and safety standards on site.
Medium Health and safety remains an operational priority for Berkeley and our AIIR at the year
end was 100, well below our target of 250 and remains one of the best in the industry.
Our teams continue to operate to stringent Group-wide health and safety standards
that are audited regularly by our Group and local assessors and management. This year
we have introduced new arrangements in relation to the activities of Berkeley Living.
We run campaigns for high-risk activities such as Working at Height, reinforce our core
programmes on a regular basis, and learn lessons from injury and non-injury incidents
that may occur during the year. This year we have engaged with scaffolding contractors
to promote best practice and reduce the risk of incidents arising from working
at height.
Read more on
pages 54 to 55
HOMES &
CUSTOMERS
Key | Our Vision priorities
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
91 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Risk description and impact Approach to mitigating risk
Link
to Our
Vision
Residual
risk rating
Likelihood
change
Impact
change
during
year Commentary and developments if any during the year
Sustainability
and climate
change
Berkeley is aware of the environmental
and social impact of the homes and
places that it builds, both throughout
the development process and during
occupation and use by customers and
the wider community.
Failure to address sustainability issues
could affect the Group’s ability to
acquire land, gain planning permission,
manage sites effectively and respond
to increasing customer demands for
sustainable homes and communities.
The transition to a lower carbon
economy and the physical effects of
temperature changes could particularly
have wide ranging impacts on Berkeley.
Our approach to sustainability is integrated into our
responsible business strategy, Our Vision.
Sustainability Standards are set at a Group level and
set out the minimum Berkeley requirements for new
developments and the operation of our construction
sites, divisional offices and sales suites. These are
supported by more detailed procedures within our
Sustainability Management System, including a
requirement for an Environmental Risk Register for
each site and the completion of at least quarterly
on-site sustainability assessments by our internal
sustainability professionals.
Our science-based targets (SBTs) and Net Zero
Transition Plan help drive action to reduce emissions
from our direct activities and our value chain, with
collaboration a key focus. We look to build homes
and developments that are resilient to climate
change, including the incorporation of nature-based
sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) and measures to
reduce overheating risks.
Read more about our mitigation actions
for key risks identified through climate
scenario analysis on
pages 66 to 71
Medium Berkeley monitors and takes action to ensure readiness with evolving regulation. The
launch of the Future Homes Standard in March 2026 has provided certainty around
the technical requirements and timelines for delivering energy efficient and low carbon
new homes. Whilst we have been preparing for the changes for some time, the revised
approved document Part L will have cost and technical implications for some sites.
Long-term stewardship of biodiversity net gain (BNG) has been a key area of
discussion with our managing agents and we responded to the UK Government’s
consultation on improving BNG implementation for minor, medium and brownfield
development. Recognising expected amendments to UK Listing Rules to reference
UK Sustainability Reporting Standards (UK SRS), Berkeley has completed an updated
materiality assessment.
In September 2025, we achieved validation of our net zero target and updated
near-term SBTs across scopes 1, 2 and 3. Following this, a Net Zero Transition Plan
was published, detailing a 20-year roadmap of planned decarbonisation milestones
and actions.
Transparency and action has led to Berkeley achieving an ‘A’ rating from CDP for both
its climate change and water security disclosures. We have also been named a CDP
Supplier Engagement Leader.
Read more on
pages 44 to 51, 58 to 77, 117 and 157 to 159
Health
and safety
Berkeley’s operations have a direct
impact on the health and safety of its
people, contractors and members of
the public.
A lack of adequate procedures and
systems to reduce the dangers inherent
in the construction process increases
the risk of accidents or site-related
catastrophes, including fire and flood,
which could result in serious injury or loss
of life, or impact the business through
financial penalties or disruption
to operations.
Berkeley considers this to be an area of critical
importance. Berkeley’s health and safety strategy is
set by the Board. Dedicated health and safety teams
are in place in each division and at Head Office.
Procedures, training and reporting are all regularly
reviewed to maintain high standards and ensure that
comprehensive accident investigation procedures are
in place. Insurance is held to cover the risks inherent in
large-scale construction projects.
The Group continues to implement initiatives to
improve health and safety standards on site.
Medium Health and safety remains an operational priority for Berkeley and our AIIR at the year
end was 100, well below our target of 250 and remains one of the best in the industry.
Our teams continue to operate to stringent Group-wide health and safety standards
that are audited regularly by our Group and local assessors and management. This year
we have introduced new arrangements in relation to the activities of Berkeley Living.
We run campaigns for high-risk activities such as Working at Height, reinforce our core
programmes on a regular basis, and learn lessons from injury and non-injury incidents
that may occur during the year. This year we have engaged with scaffolding contractors
to promote best practice and reduce the risk of incidents arising from working
at height.
Read more on
pages 54 to 55
Key | Risk
Increased risk No change Decreased risk
92 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Risk tables continued
Risk description and impact Approach to mitigating risk
Link
to Our
Vision
Residual
risk rating
Likelihood
change
Impact
change
during
year Commentary and developments if any during the year
Product
quality and
reputation
Berkeley has a reputation for high
standards of build safety and quality in
its product.
Failure to deliver against these standards
and wider development obligations
could expose customers to issues with
their home and Berkeley to reputational
damage, reduced sales and increased
cost to rectify issues.
Detailed reviews are undertaken of the proposed
scheme both during the acquisition of the site and
throughout the build process to ensure that product
quality is maintained.
The Group has detailed quality assurance procedures
in place surrounding both design and build to
ensure the adequacy of build at each key stage of
construction. A Group building safety and quality
assurance team undertakes themed audits of sites.
Customer satisfaction surveys are undertaken on
the handover of our homes, and feedback is
incorporated into the specification and design of
subsequent schemes.
Medium The Group’s continued focus on improving the quality of design and product, with
attention to every detail in our homes, remains at the heart of our delivery.
We continually review our Building Safety and Quality Assurance (BSQA) system
to make further enhancements and respond to the requirements of the Building
Safety Act. This year we have engaged with Government and industry to help shape
guidance on the Gateway 2 submission process for high risk buildings and the practical
implementation of the Construction Products Reform White Paper.
In addition, we constantly look at ways to meet the demands of changing lifestyles,
as well as the rapidly changing levels of expectations from our customers. Customers
remain at the heart of all of our decisions, and Berkeley prioritises customer service,
communities, nature and overall quality of place through its Our Vision targets.
Read more on
pages 43 and 54 to 55
Cost and
availability
of materials
and labour
Building costs are affected by the
availability of skilled labour and the price
and availability of materials, suppliers
and contractors.
Declines in the availability of a skilled
workforce, and changes to these prices
could impact on our build programmes
and the profitability of our schemes.
A procurement and programming strategy for
each development is agreed by the divisional
Board before site acquisition, whilst a further
assessment of procurement and programming is
undertaken and agreed by the divisional Board
prior to the commencement of construction. Build
cost reconciliations and build programme dates are
presented and reviewed in detail at divisional cost
review meetings each month.
Our Group supply chain team builds strong
relationships with the supply chain. Our Vision
includes ongoing commitments to training for both
our employees and our indirect workforce.
Medium Build cost inflation remained broadly flat during 2025 and into early 2026. However,
more recently, oil based and energy intensive products have increased in price as a
result of the Iran conflict. Berkeley is not materially impacted due to its procurement
agreements. However, as these unwind, and in the absence of a resolution to the
conflict, there may be future impact. Availability of materials has not been impacted.
The Group maintains a range of agreements with manufacturers, which alongside cost
have been assessed to cover topics such as quality, sustainability and modern slavery.
Availability of skilled labour has remained stable during the year due to ongoing weak
demand; albeit labour costs continue to be impacted by recent increases in the National
Living Wage and National Minimum Wage and employer NI rate rises.
Read more on
pages 22 and 116
Cyber – data
and security
The Group acknowledges that it places
significant reliance upon the availability,
accuracy and confidentiality of all of
its information systems and the data
contained therein.
The Group could suffer significant
financial and reputational damage
because of the corruption, loss or theft
of data, whether inadvertent or via a
deliberate, targeted cyber-attack.
Berkeley’s systems and control procedures are
designed to ensure that confidentiality, availability and
integrity are not compromised.
Our Information Security Programme focuses
primarily on the detection and prevention of security
incidents and potential data breaches.
An IT Security Committee meets quarterly to address
all cyber security matters.
The Group operates multiple physical data centres
supported by cloud-based services thereby reducing
centralised risk exposure. An IT disaster recovery plan
is regularly assessed.
The Group has cyber insurance in place to reduce any
potential financial impact.
High Cyber risk remained elevated throughout the year, with a number of high-profile
incidents reported across UK organisations, demonstrating the potential for operational
disruption, financial loss and reputational damage.
The threat environment continues to be characterised by ransomware and data
extortion, increasingly accompanied by attempted disruption to business services and
pressure to restore operations quickly.
Recent incidents have also highlighted the importance of managing exposure across
third parties and supplier ecosystems, alongside the continued prevalence of credential
compromise and social engineering as routes to initial access.
The increasing use of automation and AI by threat actors has improved the scale and
credibility of phishing and impersonation attempts, reinforcing the need for strong
identity controls and ongoing staff awareness.
During the year, the Group continued to strengthen preventative and detective controls,
enhance monitoring and incident response capability, and reinforce resilience measures
(including backup and recovery) and user awareness to reduce the likelihood and
impact of a material cyber incident.
Read more on
page 109
HOMES &
CUSTOMERS
Key | Our Vision priorities
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
93 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Risk description and impact Approach to mitigating risk
Link
to Our
Vision
Residual
risk rating
Likelihood
change
Impact
change
during
year Commentary and developments if any during the year
Product
quality and
reputation
Berkeley has a reputation for high
standards of build safety and quality in
its product.
Failure to deliver against these standards
and wider development obligations
could expose customers to issues with
their home and Berkeley to reputational
damage, reduced sales and increased
cost to rectify issues.
Detailed reviews are undertaken of the proposed
scheme both during the acquisition of the site and
throughout the build process to ensure that product
quality is maintained.
The Group has detailed quality assurance procedures
in place surrounding both design and build to
ensure the adequacy of build at each key stage of
construction. A Group building safety and quality
assurance team undertakes themed audits of sites.
Customer satisfaction surveys are undertaken on
the handover of our homes, and feedback is
incorporated into the specification and design of
subsequent schemes.
Medium The Group’s continued focus on improving the quality of design and product, with
attention to every detail in our homes, remains at the heart of our delivery.
We continually review our Building Safety and Quality Assurance (BSQA) system
to make further enhancements and respond to the requirements of the Building
Safety Act. This year we have engaged with Government and industry to help shape
guidance on the Gateway 2 submission process for high risk buildings and the practical
implementation of the Construction Products Reform White Paper.
In addition, we constantly look at ways to meet the demands of changing lifestyles,
as well as the rapidly changing levels of expectations from our customers. Customers
remain at the heart of all of our decisions, and Berkeley prioritises customer service,
communities, nature and overall quality of place through its Our Vision targets.
Read more on
pages 43 and 54 to 55
Cost and
availability
of materials
and labour
Building costs are affected by the
availability of skilled labour and the price
and availability of materials, suppliers
and contractors.
Declines in the availability of a skilled
workforce, and changes to these prices
could impact on our build programmes
and the profitability of our schemes.
A procurement and programming strategy for
each development is agreed by the divisional
Board before site acquisition, whilst a further
assessment of procurement and programming is
undertaken and agreed by the divisional Board
prior to the commencement of construction. Build
cost reconciliations and build programme dates are
presented and reviewed in detail at divisional cost
review meetings each month.
Our Group supply chain team builds strong
relationships with the supply chain. Our Vision
includes ongoing commitments to training for both
our employees and our indirect workforce.
Medium Build cost inflation remained broadly flat during 2025 and into early 2026. However,
more recently, oil based and energy intensive products have increased in price as a
result of the Iran conflict. Berkeley is not materially impacted due to its procurement
agreements. However, as these unwind, and in the absence of a resolution to the
conflict, there may be future impact. Availability of materials has not been impacted.
The Group maintains a range of agreements with manufacturers, which alongside cost
have been assessed to cover topics such as quality, sustainability and modern slavery.
Availability of skilled labour has remained stable during the year due to ongoing weak
demand; albeit labour costs continue to be impacted by recent increases in the National
Living Wage and National Minimum Wage and employer NI rate rises.
Read more on
pages 22 and 116
Cyber – data
and security
The Group acknowledges that it places
significant reliance upon the availability,
accuracy and confidentiality of all of
its information systems and the data
contained therein.
The Group could suffer significant
financial and reputational damage
because of the corruption, loss or theft
of data, whether inadvertent or via a
deliberate, targeted cyber-attack.
Berkeley’s systems and control procedures are
designed to ensure that confidentiality, availability and
integrity are not compromised.
Our Information Security Programme focuses
primarily on the detection and prevention of security
incidents and potential data breaches.
An IT Security Committee meets quarterly to address
all cyber security matters.
The Group operates multiple physical data centres
supported by cloud-based services thereby reducing
centralised risk exposure. An IT disaster recovery plan
is regularly assessed.
The Group has cyber insurance in place to reduce any
potential financial impact.
High Cyber risk remained elevated throughout the year, with a number of high-profile
incidents reported across UK organisations, demonstrating the potential for operational
disruption, financial loss and reputational damage.
The threat environment continues to be characterised by ransomware and data
extortion, increasingly accompanied by attempted disruption to business services and
pressure to restore operations quickly.
Recent incidents have also highlighted the importance of managing exposure across
third parties and supplier ecosystems, alongside the continued prevalence of credential
compromise and social engineering as routes to initial access.
The increasing use of automation and AI by threat actors has improved the scale and
credibility of phishing and impersonation attempts, reinforcing the need for strong
identity controls and ongoing staff awareness.
During the year, the Group continued to strengthen preventative and detective controls,
enhance monitoring and incident response capability, and reinforce resilience measures
(including backup and recovery) and user awareness to reduce the likelihood and
impact of a material cyber incident.
Read more on
page 109
Key | Risk
Increased risk No change Decreased risk
94 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT94 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Corporate Governance
Pages
94–161
95 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
95 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
96 | Executive Chair’s introduction
98 | Board of Directors
102 | Board leadership
and Company purpose
103 | Division of responsibilities
106 | Our culture
108 | Board activities during the year
114 | Our stakeholders
118 | Nomination Committee Report
124 | Audit Committee Report
128 | Directors’ Remuneration Report
154 | Directors’ Report
Woodberry Down,
Finsbury Park
At Woodberry Down we are working in
partnership with the London Borough of
Hackney and Notting Hill Genesis to deliver
one of the UK’s most ambitious estate
regeneration and placemaking programmes.
The masterplan, co-designed with the local
community, will deliver 6,500 high quality
private and affordable homes, set around
a welcoming natural landscape, including
the 4.5-acre Spring Park and Woodberry
Wetlands nature reserve.
96 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT96 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Executive Chair’s introduction
This has been a year of leadership transition, shareholder
engagement and disciplined strategic execution.
On 5 September 2025, I moved from the role of Chief
Executive Officer, which I had held since 2009, to become
Executive Chair of Berkeley.
At the same time, Richard Stearn, who had served
as Berkeley’s Chief Financial Officer since April 2015,
became Chief Executive Officer. On 29 September 2025,
Neil Eady was appointed Chief Financial Officer.
Michael Dobson retired as Independent Non-Executive
Chairman and William Jackson retired as a Non-Executive
Director, both at the conclusion of the 2025 Annual
General Meeting.
On behalf of the whole Board,
I thank both Michael and William
for their significant contributions
to Berkeley during their tenure.
The Board acknowledged that the
Code states that the roles of chair
and chief executive should not be
exercised by the same individual
and that a chief executive should
not become chair of the same
company. However, the Code
recognises that this is possible in
exceptional circumstances and
subject to the Board setting out
its reasons to all shareholders
and engaging in consultation. We
explain in full in the Nomination
Committee Report how and why
the Board concluded this was the
right decision for Berkeley at this
time, the extensive shareholder
consultation we undertook and
the safeguards we put in place.
The 2025 Annual General Meeting
also considered a new Directors’
Remuneration Policy and a new
Performance Share Plan, both
of which were approved by a
majority of shareholders, although
the new Remuneration Policy did
attract 23% of votes against.
We engaged extensively with
shareholders during the pre-
AGM consultation period and
received written feedback from
proxy advisers including ISS, to
which the Board responded in a
public letter to all shareholders
published on 22 August 2025
and available on our website. In
accordance with the Code, we
published a six-month update
statement on 4 March 2026.
The Board welcomed Richard
Dakin and Barbara Richmond
as Independent Non-Executive
Directors with effect from
5 September 2025 and
1 January 2026 respectively.
Rob Perrins
Executive Chair
23 June 2026
I am pleased to present the Corporate
Governance Report for the financial
year ended 30 April 2026 prepared
in accordance with the UK Corporate
Governance Code 2024.
Rob Perrins | Executive Chair
Spring Hill, Maidenhead
Oval Village
97 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
UK Corporate Governance
Code Compliance
The UK Corporate Governance
Code 2024 (the Code) applied to
the Company during the 2025/26
financial year, with the exception
of Provision 29 (with Provision
29 of the 2018 edition of the UK
Corporate Governance Code
applying during the financial
year). A full text of the Code is on
the Financial Reporting Council’s
website at www.frc.org.uk.
The Board applied the Code’s
Principles during the year and the
ways in which they were applied
during 2025/26 are evidenced
throughout this Annual Report as
set out in the table opposite.
In relation to the Provisions of the
Code, Provision 9 states that a
chief executive should not go on
to be chair of the same company.
The Board determined that,
due to circumstances specific
to Berkeley, the appointment of
Rob Perrins as Executive Chair
represented an exceptional case
in the long-term interests of the
Company and its shareholders.
The Company complied with
all the Provisions of the Code
during the year with the exception
of Provisions 9 and 19 from
5September 2025 onwards
because Rob Perrins was not
independent on appointment and
has served on the Board for more
than nine years since he was
first appointed.
Full details of the Board’s
reasoning as to why the
appointment of Rob Perrins as
Executive Chair represented the
right outcome for Berkeley and
the robust safeguards put in place,
are set out in the Nomination
Committee Report.
The Board has reviewed the Annual
Report and Accounts and considers
that, taken as a whole, it is fair,
balanced and understandable and
provides the information necessary
for shareholders to assess the
Company’s position, performance,
business model and strategy.
Board Leadership and Company Purpose
Division of Responsibilities
Composition, Succession and Evaluation
Audit, Risk and Internal Control
Remuneration
F: Role of the Chair
G: Division of responsibilities
H: Role of the Non-Executive Directors
I: Board policies, processes, information,
time and resources
J: Appointments to the Board
K: Board skills, knowledge and experience
L: Board evaluation
M: Independence and effectiveness of
internal and external auditors
N: Fair, balanced and understandable
O: Risk and internal control framework
P: Alignment to purpose, values and
long-term success
Q: Remuneration policy
R: Independent judgement and discretion
98–100
102, 106–107
108–113
110–117
52, 79, 106–107, 115,
122–123, 151–153
103–105, 120–121
103–105
103–104, 109
102–103
96–100, 109, 118–121
96–100, 118–122
121–122
126–127
97
80–93, 126–127
129–137, 139–142
135–138
129–131, 139, 147–149
Pages
A: Board of Directors
B: Purpose, values, strategy and culture
C: Board decisions and outcomes
D: Stakeholder engagement
E: Workforce policies and practices
98 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Board of Directors
The Board’s primary
responsibility is
leading the Company
to deliver sustainable,
profitable growth and
drive long-term value
for our shareholders.
It sets a clear
tone from the
top by providing
entrepreneurial
leadership of the
business and
custodianship of
the Berkeley brand.
Knowledge,
skills and
experience
Scan the QR code to read the
full Directors’ biographies
Key to Committees
A
Audit Committee
N
Nomination Committee
R
Remuneration Committee
Committee Chair
Richard Stearn BSc (Hons) FCA
Chief Executive
Appointed: 13 April 2015
Skills, experience and contribution
Richard was appointed Chief Executive on
5 September 2025 and was Chief Financial
Officer from April 2015. Finance Director at
Quintain Estates and Development plc from
2011 to 2015, Richard was Group Financial
Controller at the Company from 2002
to2011.
Alongside Executive Chair Rob Perrins,
Richard played a pivotal role in shaping
Berkeley 2035, the Group’s 10-year strategy,
including the establishment of Berkeley’s
Build to Rent platform. As Chief Executive,
Richard is now responsible for delivery of
the Berkeley 2035 strategy and for the
Group’s operational performance.
Richard trained and qualified as a Chartered
Accountant at PwC.
Other appointments
Trustee Director, The Berkeley Charitable
Foundation
Neil Eady BSC (Hons) ARCS FCA
Chief Financial Officer
Appointed: 29 September 2025
Skills, experience and contribution
Neil joined the Company in July 2013 and
has worked in a variety of Finance Director
roles in the Group including establishing
the St William joint venture in 2014. Prior to
his appointment as Chief Financial Officer,
Neil was Divisional Financial Director for
Berkeley Capital.
Before joining the Company, Neil was at
Land Securities for 10 years performing
a number of roles including Corporate
Finance Director.
Neil trained and qualified as a Chartered
Accountant at PwC.
Other appointments
None
N R
Rob Perrins BSc (Hons) FCA
Executive Chair
Appointed: 1 May 2001
Skills, experience and contribution
Rob was Chief Executive from 2009 until
he was appointed Chair on 5 September
2025. He joined Berkeley in 1994, has been
a Main Board member since 2001 was Chief
Financial Officer from 2001 until 2009.
Under his management, Berkeley has
increasingly focused on transforming large-
scale brownfield sites, which are beyond
the scope of conventional homebuilders;
most recently putting in place Berkeley’s
10-year strategy, Berkeley 2035, including
the development of the Company’s own
Build to Rent platform.
Rob has worked extensively in property
development throughout his career,
working on a diverse range of projects.
Other appointments
Independent Non-Executive, Public Interest
Body PwC, Non-Executive Director,
Grosvenor Property UK
Rachel Downey ACA
Senior Independent Director
Appointed: 8 December 2017 and on
8 September 2023 as Senior Independent
Director
Skills, experience and contribution
A Chartered Accountant, Rachel brings
significant experience in real estate
development and operations.
Rachel is Project Director of Manchester
Life, a joint venture between Acre Real
Estate Investment & Development LLC and
Manchester City Council, established in 2014
to make a significant contribution towards
achieving Manchester’s regeneration and
residential growth ambitions.
Additionally, Rachel is Managing Director of
Manchester Life Management Limited, which
leases and manages a portfolio of over 1,000
apartments built by Manchester Life.
Other appointments
Project Director, Manchester Life
Managing Director, Manchester Life
Management Limited
N
A
99 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
Richard Dakin
Independent Non-Executive Director
Appointed: 5 September 2025
Skills, experience and contribution
Richard brings over four decades of
experience in banking, real estate
finance and corporate governance. He
retired in December 2024 as Europe
Head, Investment Banking and Debt and
Structured Finance at CBRE Group, where
he also served on the UK Management
Board and Executive Committee, chairing
the Risk Committee. Prior to CBRE, Richard
spent 32 years at Lloyds Banking Group.
A Fellow of the Royal Institution of
Chartered Surveyors, Richard served for
over nine years as a Non-Executive Director
at Derwent London plc, where he chaired
the Risk Committee and was a member of
the Audit and Nomination Committees.
Other appointments
Richard continues to chair a committee
within CBRE, which provides non-
discretionary debt and equity transactional
advice to a specific fund.
A R
R N N
Andy Kemp BA (Econ) FCA
Independent Non-Executive Director
Appointed: 1 July 2021
Skills, experience and contribution
Andy brings extensive knowledge of
accounting, risk and governance matters
from his 39-year career at PwC, having been
an audit partner for 27 years, chairman of
PwC’s Non-Executive Director Programme
and a member of PwC’s Audit and Risk
Assurance Executive Board.
Other appointments
Non-Executive Director and Chair of the
Audit and Risk Committee at Spirax Group
plc Chair, The Audit Committee Chairs’
Independent Forum, Non-Executive Director
and Chair of the Audit and Risk Committee
at Irwin Mitchell Holdings Limited and
Governor, Birkbeck University of London
Natasha Adams CCIPD
Independent Non-Executive Director
Appointed: 1 February 2022
Skills, experience and contribution
Natasha is Chief Strategy and
Transformation Officer of Tesco PLC and
is a member of the Tesco PLC Executive
Committee.
Immediately prior to her current role,
Natasha was Chief Executive Officer of
Tesco Ireland and prior to that was Group
Chief People Officer of Tesco PLC.
Other appointments
Chief Strategy and Transformation Officer,
Tesco PLC, Executive Committee member,
Tesco PLC, Board Member, Ibec
Barbara Richmond
Independent Non-Executive Director
Appointed: 1 January 2026
Skills, experience and contribution
Barbara brings directly relevant industry
expertise, coupled with extensive listed
company, retail and international markets
experience.
Barbara was Chief Financial Officer
of Redrow plc for 14 years, up to its
combination with Barratt Development
plc in August 2024 and, up until August
2025 was Group Integration & Synergies
Director of the combined business. Prior to
joining Redrow in 2010, Barbara held senior
finance and Group Finance Director roles at
a number of UK listed companies including
Inchcape plc, Croda International plc and
Whessoe plc.
Other appointments
Non-Executive Director and Chair of the
Audit and Compliance Committee, Lonza
Group AG
A A
The Ven. Elizabeth Adekunle
Independent Non-Executive Director
Appointed: 5 January 2021
Skills, experience and contribution
Liz has considerable experience of social,
political and ethical matters and brings a
valuable perspective on the potential of
urban regeneration and good placemaking
to improve the lives of those living
in the communities within which
Berkeley operates.
Previously Chaplain to Her Majesty
Queen Elizabeth II (since April 2017) and
Archdeacon of Hackney in the Diocese of
London. Liz was awarded the Freedom of
the City of London in April 2019.
Other appointments
Non-Executive Director The Royal Marsden
NHS Foundation Trust, Governor Wellington
College, Chaplain to His Majesty the King
National Police Chiefs’ Ethics Committee
Board Member and Trustee of The Berkeley
Charitable Foundation
Sarah Sands
Independent Non-Executive Director
Appointed: 30 April 2021
Skills, experience and contribution
Sarah is a journalist by profession and
was Editor of the BBC Radio 4 Today
programme from 2017 to 2020. Prior to this,
Sarah was Editor of The Evening Standard
and The Sunday Telegraph and has held
Editor in Chief and Consultant Editor roles
at Reader’s Digest and the Daily Mail.
Sarah brings to the Board a broad insight on
economic, political and social matters
Other appointments
Non-Executive Director, Channel Four
Television Corporation and CEO of Hymns
Ancient and Modern
100 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Board of Directors continued
Directors’ attendance is recorded by reference to the number of meetings that they were eligible to attend.
1. Rob Perrins was appointed Chair of the Nomination Committee on 5 September 2025.
2. Rachel Downey was appointed as a member of the Remuneration Committee on 5 September 2025.
3. Neil Eady was appointed to the Board on 29 September 2025.
4. Richard Dakin was appointed to the Board and the Audit Committee on 5 September 2025.
5. Barbara Richmond was appointed to the Board on 1 January 2026.
6. Michael Dobson and William Jackson stepped down from the Board at the AGM on 5 September 2025.
Board and Committee meeting attendance
Board
Audit
Committee
Nomination
Committee
Remuneration
Committee
Number of meetings held throughout 2025/26 7 4 3 4
Rob Perrins
1
7/7 2/2
Rachel Downey
2
7/7 4/4 3/3 2/2
Richard Stearn 7/7
Neil Eady
3
5/5
Andy Kemp 7/7 4/4 3/3 4/4
Natasha Adams 7/7 3/3 4/4
The Ven. Elizabeth Adekunle 6/7
Sarah Sands 7/7 4/4
Richard Dakin
4
5/5 3/3
Barbara Richmond
5
3/3
Former Directors
6
Michael Dobson 2/2 2/2
William Jackson 2/2 2/2
Non-Executive Director skills matrix
PLC Board Experience
Recent Relevant Financial Experience
Construction
Development & Regeneration
Finance & Banking
Commerce
Governance
People & Culture
Media & Communications
Public Sector & Government
International
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
White City Living
101 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
102 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT102 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Board leadership and Company purpose
The Board has collective
responsibility for
promoting the long-term
success of the Company
in a safe and sustainable
manner in order to create
value for stakeholders.
The Board provides
leadership and sets
the Company’s purpose,
values and long-term
strategicobjectives.
During the year, the Board has
focused on the effective delivery
of the Company’s purpose, vision
and values in the context of a
complex operating environment
and the role of housing in the
Government’s growth agenda.
Given the changes to the Board
in the year, it also focused on
the importance of maintaining
Berkeley’s unique business model
and culture to drive long-term
value for shareholders, while also
recognising the need to formulate
and execute a successful
succession strategy.
The Board provides direction,
support and constructive
challenge to the Executiveteam.
During the year, this was
evidenced by the Board’s ongoing
review of strategy culminating
in the 1 April 2026 Strategy and
Trading Update which saw a
rephasing of the delivery of the
Berkeley 2035 Corporate Strategy
over the next four years with the
Board determining to reduce
work in progress investment to
match the sales levels currently
being achieved, putting the best
interests of shareholders ahead
of the pursuit of short-term profit
targets to deliver the long-term
success of the Company.
Further information is set out in
the Executive Chair’s Statement
and Chief Executive’s Review on
pages 08 to 09 and 18 to 27 of
the Strategic Report.
Meetings
The full Board met formally seven
times during the year ended
30April 2026 and attendance
is set out on page 100.
Meetings considered standing
agenda items and deep-dives
on topics of particular focus and
importance for the Company.
Meetings include site visits where
the Board meets the workforce at
all levels across the Group. Further
information is provided on pages
111 to 113 and 115.
The Non-Executive Directors met
with the Non-Executive Chairman
and Senior Independent Director
during the year. Following his
appointment, the Non-Executive
Directors have also met with the
Executive Chair in addition to the
scheduled meetings.
The Non-Executive Directors
met without the Executive
Directors being present to discuss
succession and the leadership
transition. Meetings relating
to the Chairman’s succession
were chaired by the Senior
Independent Director.
Board and Committee papers
and agendas are sent out in the
week prior to each meeting,
allowing sufficient time for
review and consideration of the
documentsbeforehand.
Standing Board
Agenda Items
— Health and Safety
— Building Fire Safety
— Executive Chair’s Report
— Chief Executive’s Report
— Finance and Performance
— Risk Management
— Corporate Broker Reports
— Share Register Analysis
— Litigation
— Corporate Governance
— Board Committee Reports
— Customer Service
— Economicand Housing
Market
Oakhill, Hildenborough
103 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
Division of responsibilities
The Board has a range of experience and has strong
knowledge in areas of property development,
construction, media and communications, public
sector, Government, communities, inclusivity and social
engagement, finance and banking, and commerce
and governance, both in the UK and internationally.
It is the balance of skills, experience, independence
and knowledge of the Board as a whole which ensures
that the duties and responsibilities of the Board and
itsCommittees are dischargedeffectively.
Rob Perrins, as Executive Chair, is
responsible for leading the Board
and ensuring its effectiveness;
setting the Board’s agenda and
ensuring adequate time for
discussion of strategic and other
matters; facilitating constructive
relations between executive and
non-executive directors; and
representing Berkeley to major
shareholders, Government and
other key stakeholders. The
Executive Chair is also responsible
for Group strategy in collaboration
with the CEO and for external
public affairs, including Berkeley’s
engagement with Government
on housing policy and
planning reform.
Richard Stearn, as CEO, has
day-to-day responsibility for
the operational and financial
management of the Group,
including executing the Berkeley
strategy and overseeing strategic
risk management. The CEO has
accountability to the Board for
delivery of the Group’s targets
and for all matters not expressly
reserved to the Executive Chair or
the Board.
Neil Eady, as CFO, is responsible
for leading the Group’s finance
function and overseeing
financial reporting, treasury,
tax, investor relations and the
Responsible Business, People and
Sustainability functions.
Rachel Downey serves as Senior
Independent Director (SID).
Given the nature of the Executive
Chair role, the SID plays a
particularly important role in the
Board’s governance. During the
year, the SID was an additional
point of contact for corporate
governance engagement with
major shareholders and consulted
with major shareholders on behalf
of the Board in connection with
the Executive Chair appointment.
The SID has been available to
shareholders throughout the year
and engaged with institutional
shareholders representing over
50% of Berkeley’s voting share
capital prior to the 2025 AGM.
The Board considers all of the
Non-Executive Directors to be
independent in character and
judgement, and to be free
from any business or other
relationship that could materially
interfere with the exercise of
independent judgement.
The Board has assessed
independence against the criteria
set out in Provision 10 of the
Code and is satisfied that each
Non-Executive Director meets the
independence test.
Rachel Downey was appointed
as a Non-Executive Director on
8 December 2017. In light of
tenure, the Board has reviewed
her continued independence
and is satisfied that she remains
independent in character
and judgement.
Formal reporting lines and
delegated levels of authority exist
within the Group and the review
of risk and performance occurs at
multiple levels.
Strong central functions, including
Risk, Legal, Health and Safety,
Building Safety and Quality
Assurance, Responsible Business
and Corporate Governance,
provide support and consistency
to the Board.
The principal treasury-related
risks, decisions and control
processes are managed by the
Group finance function, under
the direction of the Chief
Financial Officer.
Conflicts of interest
In accordance with the Companies
Act 2006, the Company’s Articles
of Association allow the Board
to authorise potential conflicts
of interest that may arise and to
impose such limits or conditions
as it thinks fit. The decision to
authorise a conflict of interest can
only be made by non-conflicted
Directors (those who have no
interest in the matter being
considered) and in making such a
decision the Directors must act in
a way they consider in good faith
will be most likely to promote the
Company’s success.
The Company has established a
procedure whereby actual and
potential conflicts of interest of
current and proposed roles to be
undertaken by Directors of the
Board with other organisations
are regularly reviewed in
respect of the nature and time
commitment of those roles and
for proper authorisation to be
sought prior to the appointment
of any new Director. The Board
considers these procedures to
be workingeffectively.
104 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Division of responsibilities continued
Responsibilities:
— leading the Board and ensuring its
overall effectiveness, setting the agenda
and ensuring that accurate, timely and
clear information is provided to the
Board as required;
— setting, shaping and sustaining
the culture in the Boardroom and
the Group;
— overseeing the implementation of high
standards of corporategovernance;
— encouraging constructive Board
relations and open debate and ensuring
that each Director contributes to
effective decision making; and
— ensuring effective communication
between the Board and shareholders
and ensuring the Board understands
the views of the Company’s
key stakeholders.
Responsibilities:
— bringing an external perspective
in providing additional advice and
expertise to support the Board in
setting, developing and monitoring the
implementation of strategy;
— providing sound judgement,
objectivity and an appropriate level of
constructive challenge and scrutiny of
Board decisions;
— serving on Board Committees to
ensure that fair and balanced policies
are implemented, including Executive
remuneration and risk management;
and
— having an awareness of shareholder and
other stakeholder matters and offering
guidance as required.
Executive
Chair
Rob Perrins
Senior
Independent
Director
Rachel Downey
Non-
Executive
Directors
Andy Kemp
Elizabeth
Adekunle
Sarah Sands
Natasha Adams
Richard Dakin
Barbara Richmond
Responsibilities:
— working closely with the Executive
Chair, serving as a sounding board and
providing support and advice in the
delivery of objectives;
— leading the chair successionprocess;
— serving as an intermediary for other
Directors and shareholders, including
meeting with Non-Executive Directors
annually, without the Executive
Chair present to evaluate the Executive
Chair’s performance, and provide
feedback to the Executive Chair and
Chief Executive Officer; and
— being available to shareholders and
other Non-Executive Directors to
address any concerns not otherwise
dealt with through usual channels
of communication.
Nomination Committee
Chair: Rob Perrins
Responsibilities:
The Nomination Committee
ensures that the membership
and composition of the Board,
including the balance of skills,
experience and diversity, is
appropriate, as well as giving
full consideration to succession
planning on a regular basis.
For the Nomination Committee
Report see pages 118 to 123
For the Audit Committee Report
see pages 124 to 127
Audit Committee
Chair: Andy Kemp
Responsibilities:
The Audit Committee is
responsible for monitoring and
reviewing the financial reporting
and accounting policies of
the Company, reviewing the
adequacy of internal controls
and the activities of the
Group’s internal audit function,
including financial, operational
and compliance controls, and
overseeing the effectiveness
of the external auditor.
Remuneration Committee
Chair: Natasha Adams
Responsibilities:
The Remuneration Committee
is responsible for determining
the Company’s policy for
Executive remuneration
and the precise terms of
employment and remuneration
of the Executive Directors.
For the Directors’ Remuneration
Report see pages 128 to 153
105 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
Chief Executive
Richard Stearn
Responsibilities:
— day-to-day running of the Group’s business
andoperations;
— leading the Group’s strategic direction,
proposing, developing and delivering the overall
strategy and business plans to enable the Group
to meet its objectives, having regard to the
needs of keystakeholders;
— overseeing and maintaining relationships with
investors and other key stakeholders;
— ensuring the appropriateness of the Group’s risk
management strategy; and
— ensuring effective policies and procedures for
the management, development and succession
planning of the management team and the
Company’s staff.
Chief Financial Officer
Neil Eady
Responsibilities:
— managing the financial affairs of the
Group, including:
—financial reporting
—investor relations
—tax
—treasury
—internal audit
—internal control
—insurance functions
— managing the relationship with the external
auditor; and
— overseeing the Responsible Business,
Sustainability and People functions.
Executive Committee
The Executive Committee meets regularly and
reviews the financial and operating performance
of the Group.
Chaired by the Executive Chair, the Executive
Committee also comprises the CEO, the CFO,
Piers Clanford (COO), Paul Vallone, Elkie Russell
and Group Solicitor, Wendy Pritchard.
The Committee is supported by the Company
Secretary, Victoria Mee.
Key responsibilities include:
— business planning;
— reviewing the financial and operating
performance of all Group divisions
and companies;
— risk management;
— cash management;
— delivery of Group strategy;
— legal and regulatory matters;
— brand and reputation;
— relationships with local authority
and Government stakeholders; and
— people retention and development.
Divisional boards
Key responsibilities include:
— health and safety
— sales and marketing
— land and planning
— people retention and development
— regulatory matters
— production
— assessing the impact of the economic
and political environment
— site-specific matters
— customer service
Operational Committees
— Health and Safety
— Building Safety and Quality Assurance
— IT
— People
— Customer Services
— Land and Planning
— Commercial
— Technical
— Sales and Marketing
— Sustainability
— Estates Management
106 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Our culture
Berkeley’s unique culture is the
sum of our shared values, vision,
traditions and overarching sense
of purpose.
It has a dynamic and energising
effect on the way we work,
motivating our people, and driving
performance and outcomes at all
levels of the Company.
Our goal is to cultivate an
environment where our people are
supported, empowered and united
by a shared purpose and values.
Our strong, values-based working
culture supports our people and
underpins our business strategy.
The Board continues to embed,
monitor and reinforce our culture
in all aspects of the business.
How we assess, monitor
andembed our culture
1
Customers at the heart ofeverything
The Board challenges the business to deliver high
standards of customer service, monitors customer
satisfaction levels and interrogates underlyingtrends.
The Board monitors the outcomes of engagement
at each stage of the customer journey, and actively
seeks to ensure that any issues arising are resolved
promptly and effectively.
2
Creating a supportive, safeand
inclusive working environment
Our responsible business strategy, Our Vision, sets
out our goal to cultivate an environment where
people feel supported and empowered.
The Board helps to shape this through our people
framework, including our EDI approach and health
and safetystrategy. The Board monitors and
provides challenge against a range of performance
metrics in this area, including staff turnover,
staff survey results, accident rates, workforce
demographics and our emerging talent programme
including apprenticeship and graduate schemes.
Site visits allow the Board to engage with
employees from a variety of roles, and see
them in their working environments.
3
Passion for people andcommunities
The Executive Committee reviews the planning
and placemaking strategies for each site as-well-as
scrutinising bespoke Community Plans to ensure
they embed strong community engagement and
set a shared vision for an inclusive and welcoming
neighbourhood. The Board monitors these positive
social outcomes through site visits and Our Vision
reporting.
107 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
5
Sustainable, responsible
and long term
Our Vision helps us to deliver
a lasting positive impact for
society and the natural world.
This is embedded at all levels,
and helps to unite our people in
working towards common goals.
Sustainability and responsible
business practice are central
to Our Vision, which is set
and monitored by the Board,
and which includes targets
and actions to drive positive
outcomes.
8
Innovation and
industryleadership
The Board promotes innovation
andbest practice across the
business and challenges Berkeley
to maintain its industry-leading
performance across a wide range
of areas, including customer
satisfaction, build quality,
brownfield regeneration and
nature recovery.
4
Enhancing quality
inevery small detail
The Executive Committee
reviews and signs off detailed
plans and specifications of
each development. Directors
undertake regular site visits
to monitor build quality.
Visits by Non-Executive
Directors highlight differing
stakeholder perspectives.
The Board monitors and
challenges quality metrics and
interrogates underlying causes.
6
Collaborative and responsive partners
The Executive Directors monitors
Berkeley’s long-term partnerships,
which are fundamental to the
successful delivery of large-scale
urban regeneration projects.
Directors maintain regular
engagement with central and
local government, alongside
community, housing association
and landowner partners to ensure
we continue to understand
and deliver against their goals.
TheBoard interrogates individual
challenges and solutions
developed across our sites to
ensure learning and innovation is
shared across theGroup.
7
Autonomy, independence and entrepreneurial flair
We operate through autonomous
operating companies, as well as
a network of international offices
in key markets across the globe.
Our companies are empowered
to develop unique solutions
to unlock each site and create
places of lasting quality and
value, with support from strong
central functions including Legal,
Responsible Business, Building
Safety and Quality Assurance,
Health and Safety
and Corporate
Governance.
Our values
Excellence through detail
Be passionate
Respect people
Think creatively
Have integrity
108 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT108 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Board activities during the year
The governance
structure on pages
103 to 105 of this
report sets out the
key responsibilities
of the Board. These
responsibilities are
met through a number
of standing Board
agenda items for
which reports are
presented as set out
on page 102.
Risk appetite and evaluation
of strategy is a cornerstone
of the Board’s considerations
and remains enshrined in all
reports to theBoard.
The focus of Board activities
can largely be categorised
into four areas: strategy,
operations, finance
and governance.
Strategy
2035 CorporateStrategy
On 1 April 2026, Berkeley
published a Strategy and
Trading Update in response
tothe current environment.
The Board regards this
strategy update as
consistentwith Berkeley’s
long-term objectives and as
demonstrating the disciplined,
long-term approach to capital
allocation that is central to
Berkeley’s culture.
The Board maintains close
oversight of strategic
implementation.
Responsible Business
Strategy
The Board monitors the
Company’s performance
against targets and long-term
responsible business goals. The
2025/26 review demonstrated
strong progress and the Board
endorsed a proposal from
the business to streamline
and update the responsible
business priorities under Our
Vision to enable the inclusion
of new business areas such as
Berkeley Living. Full details are
set out on pages 36 and 40 to
41 of theStrategic Report.
Political and Public Affairs
The focus of the Executive Chair’s
standing report and subject of
a deep dive during the year, the
Board receives detailed updates
on the current political landscape
and public affairs that help
shape Berkeley’s communication,
engagement approach and
implementation of strategy.
Regulatory Framework
The Board is provided with
updates to the regulatory
landscape. The Board has
monitored the impact of the
Building Safety Regulator and
regulatory framework relating to
the Building Safety Act 2022. The
implementation of the Building
Safety Regulator’s new Gateway
process for the approval of
Building Regulation compliance
has lengthened the time between
obtaining planning approval
and starting on site by around
twelve months.
Sales Demand
The Board monitors sales
performance and requirements
against pipeline to ensure
that capital is appropriately
deployed at all stage of the
development process.
Site Viability
The Board receives updates
ateach meeting on the
planningenvironment, key
planning milestones of sites
andsite viability.
Operations
Risk
Strategic and operational risk is
discussed at all Board meetings,
with emerging risks considered
on an ongoing basis with detailed
consideration being given by
the Board to the implications
for strategic implementation
and the effectiveness of
the risk management and
controls framework.
Health and Safety
Health and safety is discussed
at all Board meetings. Mindful
of the Group’s industry-leading
approach, the Board keeps
initiatives under review to retain
focus on this area. Further details
of the Company’s health and
safety approach are set out on
page 54 of the Strategic Report.
Building Fire Safety
Building fire safety is a standing
agenda item discussed at Board
meetings. The Board authorised
entry into the Responsible Actor
Scheme introduced under the
Building Safety Act 2022.
109 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
The Board receives reports on
the status of works required by
fire safety assessments being
instructed under the Self-
Remediation Terms and Contract.
Cyber Security and
Data Protection
Mindful of continuing cyber
security risks and data protection
requirements, the Board reviews
emerging threats and responses.
Through a steering group chaired
by the CFO that meets regularly,
the Group assesses and actions
opportunities for improvement,
and to ensure appropriate
response plans are in place.
CMA Market Investigation
The Competition and Markets
Authority’s investigation into
the sharing of information
between housebuilders is
complete, making no finding
of wrongdoing. To resolve
this matter, Berkeley, together
with the other housebuilders
investigated, has given certain
commitments to CMA, including a
contribution to a payment of £100
million in aggregate made by
the housebuilders to be applied
towards affordable housing.
Supply Chain Resilience
The Commercial Committee,
consisting of operating division
commercial directors, monitors
risks around the Group’s supply
chain and works across the
divisions to mitigate such risks
and reports through to the
Executive Committee from which
the Board receives updates.
Finance
Shareholder Returns
During the year, the Board
returned £233 million to
shareholders via share buy-backs
and cancelled the associated 6.3
million shares. The Board returned
an additional £23.2 million through
the repurchase of 686,543 shares
for cancellation under a formal
share buy-back programme
announced on 30April 2026. For
further detailsrefer to page 154.
Core Funding and Liquidity
On 18 June 2026, the Board
increased the borrowing capacity
of the Company by £200 million.
The Group’s borrowing capacity of
£1.4 billion comprises a £1 billion
bank facility with a term to June
2031 and £400 million unsecured
listed bonds which mature in
August 2031. See Note 2.27 to the
Consolidated Financial Statements.
Annual Report and Accounts
During the year, the Board
reviewed and approved the
Annual Report and Accounts
and interim results, along with
associated press releases and
trading updates.
Company Tax Policy
The Board oversees the Group Tax
Policy and undertakes an annual
review, or more frequently, if there
are material changes in the
tax environment.
Governance
Whistleblowing
The Group’s Whistleblowing
Policy is overseen by the
Board and enables Directors,
management, employees and
external stakeholders to report
any concerns in confidence,
outside of normal reporting
channels. Concerns are subject to
proportionate and independent
investigation and may include
malpractice, financial irregularity,
breaches of any Group
procedures, or other matters.
Bribery Act and Anti-Money
Laundering Regulations
The Board has responsibility for
complying with the requirements
of the Bribery Act 2010 and The
Money Laundering, Terrorist
Financing and Transfer of Funds
(Information on the Payer)
Regulations 2017 and is charged
with overseeing the development
and implementation of the Group’s
policies and procedures and
monitoring ongoing compliance.
Board and Committee
Composition
The Board has reviewed the
independence and contribution
of each of the Non-Executive
Directors in accordance with
Provisions 10 and 18 of the
Code and concluded that they
each continued to maintain
and contribute an independent
view in all Board deliberations,
consistently providing robust
challenge andscrutiny.
Rob Perrins became Executive
Chair and Richard Stearn Chief
Executive on 5 September 2025.
Neil Eady was appointed Chief
Financial Officer on 29 September
2025. The Board rationale
and process is set out in the
Nomination Committee Report.
Richard Dakin and Barbara
Richmond joined the Board as
Independent Non-Executive
Directors on 5 September 2025
and 1 January 2026 respectively.
On 5 September 2025, Rob
Perrins became the Chairman
of the Nomination Committee,
Rachel Downey became a
member of the Remuneration
Committee, and Richard Dakin
became a member of the
Audit Committee.
Board Evaluation
The Board evaluation for
2025/26 was internal and full
details are on pages 121 to 122
of the Nomination Committee
Report.
Site Visits
The Board attended a number
of site visits including to
Kidbrooke Village, The Green
Quarter and West End Gate.
For further details on site visits
see pages 111 to 113
110 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Board activities during the year continued
Apprentice and graduate
induction with the CEO
The Senior Independent
Director extensively engaged
with shareholders in relation
to the leadership changes and
the Chair of the Remuneration
Committee extensively engaged
with investors on the 2025
Remuneration Policy. Further
details are set out in the
Nomination Report and Directors’
Remuneration Report respectively.
Shareholders are also kept up
to date with the Company’s
activities through the results
announcementsand trading
updates. The presentations
are published on the Company
website in addition to latest
news, including regulatory
announcements.
The Executive Chair, Chief
Executive and Chief Financial
Officer meet with major
shareholders twice annually
to discuss the strategy and
operations of the Group as well
as any issues the shareholders
wish to raise. The Board is always
available to meet with any of
the major shareholders
throughout the year.
The Senior Independent Director
is available to shareholders if
they have concerns and contact
through the normal channels
has failed or when such contact
is inappropriate. Details of the
Senior Independent Director’s
engagement with shareholders in
relation to the leadership changes
are set out in the Nomination
Committee Report.
Board engagement
with stakeholders
The role of the Board is to deliver
value to all stakeholders and
promote the long-term sustainable
success of the Company.
The Board recognises the
importance of engaging with
its stakeholders on all aspects
of the Group’s activities and
this enables their interests to
be considered in the decision
making of the Board. Throughout
this year, the Board sought to
ensure that it understood the
views of stakeholders when
makingdecisions.
At Board meetings, the Executive
Chair and the Chief Executive
each provide an overview on how
the Group has delivered for its
key stakeholders.
Papers to the Board and
Committees include assessments
of the relevant stakeholder
impacts to aid the Board’s
decision-making.
The Board is aware that, in some
situations, stakeholders’ interests
will be conflicted, and they may
have to prioritise these interests.
The Board, led by the Executive
Chair, ensures that as part of its
decision-making process, the
Directors are aware and discuss
theimpacts of their decisions on
the Group’s key stakeholders.
How the Board engages
with investors
The Company regularly engages
with its current and prospective
institutional shareholders
through annual and interim
results presentations and
ad-hoc meetings.
During 2025/26 discussions
focused around the half year and
year end results, trading updates
and covered topics such as the
macro-economic environment,
economic outlook and significant
challenge presented by the delays
in regulatory decision making
in addition to the strategy
and capital allocation, and
leadership changes.
111 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
How the Board engages with
employees and the workforce
The aim of the Board is to
develop a highly talented and
skilled workforce that will work
together in a safe, healthy and
supportive environment, and take
pride in delivering outputs of the
highest quality that deliver value
to customers, local communities
and other stakeholders. The
Board recognises that talented
and motivated employees are the
Company’s strongest resource.
The health and safety of our
employees and on Berkeley sites
is paramount, in terms of both
physical and mental wellbeing and
is considered as a standing item
at Board meetings.
In addition to ensuring the safe
operation of our sites, the Board
engages with employees in a
number of different ways.
— Non-Executive Directors
visit sites collectively and
individually, meeting members
of the workforce at all levels
and gaining insights into their
experience working for
the Group.
— The Executive Directors
regularly visit the operating
companies and their
developments to oversee the
site activities.
— The Executive Directors are
present at staff conferences
to provide business updates
and encourage open group
discussions.
The People Engagement Forum
is a single platform for reviewing
employee matters, sharing best
practice and capturing its output
for the Executive Committee
andthe Board. The Company’s
focus on ‘earn and learn’ being
a key metric for the investment
in our people and shaping the
workforce of the future.
Read more about the site visits
on pages 112 to 113
The Board collectively
attended site visits at
Kidbrooke Village in
Greenwich, The Green
Quarter in Southall
and West End Gate
in Marylebone.
Site deep dives
In addition, Non-Executive
Directors individually visited a
broad range of sites across the
portfolio.
The engagement with the
workforce at all levels through
these site visits ensures that the
Board has a clear understanding
of the employee experience in the
context of the Company’s culture
and values.
112 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT112 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT112 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Site visits
Board activities during the year continued
Kidbrooke Village, Greenwich
In October 2025, the Board visited Kidbrooke
Village. Originally the site of a RAF base built in
1917, it was subsequently redeveloped as a council
housing estate by Greenwich Council – The Ferrier
Estate. Since its acquisition by Berkeley in 2007,
Kidbrooke Village has been transformed into an
award-winning, amazing new neighbourhood
and community.
An established Berkeley
development, Kidbrooke Village is
now home to over 7,500 residents,
with more than 5,400 high quality
private and affordable homes
once completed, together with
much-needed new infrastructure,
amenities, and commercial
spaces. Served by an upgraded
train station, the Village Square
is the heart of the local area
providing several convenience
stores, retail, food and beverage
outlets, a day nursery, a new
Metropolitan community policing
facility, as well as a GP surgery
and pharmacist located within a
dedicated Community Hub.
The Board toured Building G in
Phase 3 which is currently under
construction and will be the first
building at Kidbrooke Village to
welcome Berkeley Living. The
visit also included a walk through
North Cator Park to view the
award winning park and play-
space and concluded with a Q&A
session in the sales and marketing
suite, where Board Members
discussed the opportunities and
challenges of designing, selling,
delivering and managing estate
regeneration over a 40-year
period with members of the
project team.
The Green
Quarter,
Southall
In March 2026, the
Board and Executive
Committee visited
The Green Quarter in
Ealing where Berkeley
is transforming an
88-acre former
gasholder site into
a remarkable new
neighbourhood with
nature recovery at
its heart.
Once complete, The Green
Quarter will provide over 8,000
new homes for London in one of
the most biodiverse developments
in the UK, ensuring we meet our
targets of delivering a minimum
10% biodiversity net gain on every
new project.
A transformed landscape with
wetlands, parks, community areas
and acres of green open space,
the development will leave a
valuable legacy, not only for its
residents but also for the wider
community of Southall and Hayes.
The Board visited the sales
and marketing suite followed
by a tour of the development.
In addition to the Divisional
and site management team,
the Board was shown around
The Green Quarter by the site’s
Community Liaison Officer, the
Site Sustainability Manager and
a construction graduate to enable
them to appreciate the extent
113 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
113 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
of the site and the extensive
community engagement being
delivered by the team on site
and the impact it is having
locally through Parkside Yards.
This mixed-use community hub
provides a new cultural space
and exciting arts programme
and features a ceramics studio,
community centre, café and
pioneering tree nursery, woodland
trail and children’s play area.
The visit provided the Board with
an overview of the site’s history,
the complex land assembly,
the challenges of building in
a highly constrained Zone 1
location, and the ways the team
has consistently added value
throughout the life of the scheme.
Board members met key members
of the project team, including
the Production Director, Sales
Director, Project Sales Manager
and the Land and Development
Director, followed by a detailed
Q&A session.
The Board toured a collection of
apartments designed to support
independent living for over 65s,
sold to a third-party operator.
This included a visit to the
tailored amenities, such as the
in-house restaurant, swimming
pool and cinema, as well as a
two bedroom show apartment
that demonstrated the quality
and design of the interiors being
delivered across the development.
West End Gate
and Trillium,
Marylebone
The Board visited
West End Gate and
Trillium in April 2026,
taking the opportunity
to hear about
the progress
and plan for both
developments.
West End Gate is
nearing completion,
while the neighbouring
Trillium is now well
underway. Together,
the two developments
will deliver over 1,300
private and affordable
homes, alongside a
fully fitted community
space for use by
local charities.
114 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Alexandra Gate, Haringey
Customers
Placing the customer at the heart of every decision,
all the way through the development process
What matters to them?
— A bespoke, tailored service that responds to their needs.
— Clear and timely communication and updates
throughout their customer journey.
— Providing their new home on time, making them feel
valued and quick rectification of any issues that arise.
— High quality specification and construction, and energy
efficiency to reduce energy bills.
How we engage
— Each customer has a dedicated point of contact and
is encouraged to provide feedback at any stage.
MyHome Plus, available as an online portal or app, hosts
information, videos and progress updates. The app also
allows customers to leave questions and comments.
— Six weeks after a customer has completed on their
new home they are given the opportunity to complete
a detailed, independent survey covering all aspects of
their experience.
— Direct engagement with senior management
teams and the Main Board if any key issues arise.
— We hold regular resident events at our BTR
developments to help create an active community.
Actions and outcomes
— Prompt resolution of issues.
— Continued innovation to ensure we are providing
aspirational homes and exemplary service.
— Senior level review of each survey with targetedactions.
— Sales and Marketing and Customer Service Committees
review feedback trends to identify improvement areas.
— Consistent achievement of world-class levels of
customer satisfaction, with a ‘Platinum’ standard
achieved from an independent customer service body.
— Considering energy efficiency and the right energy
strategy, whilst accommodating existing regulations.
Key engagement activities this year
We offer every customer opportunities to provide
feedback throughout the buying and rental process and to
complete a survey after moving in. We also held a number
of customer focus groups.
Link to Our Vision priorities
For further detail
see pages 42 and 43
Link to KPIs
Net Promoter Score
Our stakeholders
Key | Our Vision priorities
HOMES & CUSTOMERS
115 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
Communities and
local government
Making a positive contribution to the communities
in which we work through engagement and
partnership working
What matters to them?
— Creating high quality places that improve people’s
quality of life, shaped through meaningful engagement
with local people andstakeholders.
— Delivering local priorities and positive outcomes, such
as homes, public amenities, services and jobs, and
responding to the site’s heritage and culture.
— Minimising negative impacts, such as traffic and noise.
How we engage
— Site-specific consultation and engagement strategies,
starting at an early stage, pre-planning, with the aim of
nurturing lasting, collaborative relationships throughout
project delivery.
— In a variety of ways, including open days, community
design workshops, presentations, meetings, door
knocking, walking tours, pre-application planning
meetings, exhibitions, Design Review Panels,
newsletters, notices, advertising, surveys, site-
specific websites and a mix of digital consultation and
engagement tools.
Actions and outcomes
— The creation of enduring local partnerships based on
shared objectives for the community’s future.
— Bespoke masterplans and placemaking strategies that
reflect local views, aspirations and concerns.
— Site-specific Community Plans to create social links and
integration with the wider community.
— Prioritising local people for training and job
opportunities on our sites.
— Support for local causes through the Berkeley
Foundation, and the time and talent of our teams and
supply chain.
Key engagement activities this year
We undertook several site-specific community
engagement activities across our developments.
Link to Our Vision priorities
For further detail
see pages 43 to 47
Link to KPIs
Affordable housing subsidies and wider contributions
Direct apprentices and training
Brownfield regeneration
Employees
Creating a positive working environment
and promoting health, wellbeing and inclusion
What matters to them?
— Delivering positive outcomes for local communities.
— Pride in creating great places and high quality homes.
— Career progression.
— Competitive pay and benefits.
— Equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI).
— Health, safety and wellbeing.
— The increasing cost of living and travel costs.
How we engage
— Group-wide employee surveys.
— A range of engagement initiatives through our
operating businesses including staff conferences, staff
surveys and ‘sessions with the management’.
— People networks at Group and operating business level.
— Via our Group People Committee.
— Induction process for new graduates and apprentices
who get to meet senior management and have a Q&A
session with the CEO.
— Our employee intranet, which provides updates and
keyinformation.
Actions and outcomes
— Enhancing health and wellbeing strategies, such as
wellbeing webinars and menopause plans.
— Implementing our approach to EDI, with actions taken
and events run to raise awareness and foster a culture
ofinclusion.
— Providing a range of learning and development
opportunities, hosted by our in-house training venue,
the Berkeley Academy.
— Enhancing parental leave.
Key engagement activities this year
The CEO met with groups of employees, including
graduates and apprentices. We also engaged and
requested feedback at events, such as those held for
International Women’s Day. Some of our divisions ran
pulse surveys to collate additional feedback.
Link to Our Vision priorities
For further detail
see pages 52 to 54
Link to KPIs
Annual Injury Incidence Rate
Direct apprentices and training
116 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT116 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Our stakeholders continued
Government, regulators
andindustry
Working in partnership to shape a delivery environment
which creates the conditions for growth and supports
high quality homebuilding and placemaking
What matters to them?
— The delivery of private and affordable homes.
— Regenerating brownfield land.
— Placemaking, design, build quality and building safety.
— Delivering economic growth and job opportunities.
— Tackling environmental challenges such as
climate change.
How we engage
— Responding to policy and regulatory consultations.
— Maintaining constructive dialogue with Government
departments, agencies and regulatory bodies.
— Active membership of collaborative initiatives and
membership bodies, including the Construction
Leadership Council, UK Green Building Council
(UKGBC), Future Homes Hub and BusinessLDN and
NewLondonArchitecture.
— Engaging in public debate via research and thought
leadership initiatives, conferences and roundtables.
Actions and outcomes
— Alignment of our business strategy with long-term
national and local policy objectives such as increasing
economic growth, brownfield regeneration, housing
delivery, building safety, climate action, nature recovery
and social value.
— Active contribution to policy development and public
debate on the above issues.
Key engagement activities this year
One of our senior leaders is the Building Safety sponsor
of the Construction Leadership Council which directly
engages with Government on key policies. Wehosted
several Government site visits during the year, including
a visit to Oval Village regarding the Future Homes
Standard and energy centres. We have also supported
the Government on mitigating the impact of silica on the
industry workforce.
Link to Our Vision priorities
For further detail
see pages 54 to 55
Link to KPIs
Brownfield regeneration
Direct apprentices and training
What matters to them?
— Understanding the pipeline of future opportunities and
building long-term relationships with us, across our
operating companies.
— Early engagement and feedback on tenders, with the
ability to feed into the project programme and logistics.
— High standards of health, safety and welfare and being
treated as an extended part of the project team.
— Payment in a timely manner.
How we engage
— Events such as supplier days and conferences.
— Our Supply Chain Portal, which includes health and
safety, build quality and sustainability standards.
— Throughout the tender process with frequent
communication from our commercial team, together
with formal tender meetings.
— Pre-start meetings before site works commence
and frequent contact whilst on site through regular
meetings, signage and ‘toolbox talks’.
— Via corporate memberships and industry groups.
— Workshops on ESG areas such as health and safety.
Actions and outcomes
— Long-term, collaborative supply chain partnerships.
— Procurement on overall value rather than cost alone.
— Compliance and buy-in around our site safety, quality,
ethics, human rights and environmental standards.
— Prompt payment of suppliers.
— Issuing six-monthly trade-specific opportunity
schedules to provide the supply chain with visibility of
future work.
— Working with our supply chain to help mitigate the risks
around financial stability.
Key engagement activities this year
Engagement continues on a daily basis through project
teams, and via strategic engagement with our Group
Supply Chain team for key manufacturers. There has also
been specific engagement activities around ESG topics
such as embodied carbon and modern slavery.
Link to Our Vision priorities
For further detail
see pages 50 to 51 and 54 to 56
Link to KPIs
Annual Injury Incidence Rate
Supply chain
Ensuring responsible procurement and collaborative
delivery through engagement and effective
communication at all levels with our supply chain
117 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
117 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Environment
Reducing negative impacts and working towards
environmental net gain
What matters to them?
— Reduction of environmental impact from both
construction activities and longer term through the
developments we create.
— Global impacts via the supply chain.
— Movement towards a positive environmental impact.
How we engage
— Directly with local authorities, who consult relevant
regulators such as the Environment Agency, Natural
England and water authorities on development
proposals.
— With industry organisations and initiatives, including
the UKGBC, the Supply Chain Sustainability School, the
Construction Leadership Council’s Green Construction
Board and the Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust Blue
Recovery Leaders Group.
— By responding to consultations.
— Through our supply chain to understand the
environmental credentials of materials.
Actions and outcomes
— Incorporation of key environmental targets and actions
into our responsible business strategy, Our Vision.
— Inclusion of Our Vision and Sustainability within
Main Board reporting and monthly Board-level meetings
on the topic.
— Clear standards for project teams covering all aspects of
operations and the homes and developments we create.
— A dedicated team of sustainability practitioners taking
action at a local level on a daily basis.
— The reporting of our impact publicly across a range
ofindicators.
Key engagement activities this year
We responded to Government consultations on topics
such as BNG and liaised with Government and industry on
the finalisation of the Future Homes Standard. We were
also actively involved in the Future Homes Hub, including
co-chairing the BNG Implementation Board with Defra.
Link to Our Vision priorities
For further detail
see pages 48 to 51
Link to KPIs
Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions intensity
Brownfield regeneration
Investors
Delivering long-term sustainable shareholder returns
What matters to them?
— Secure financial investment that provides sustainable
risk-adjusted returns over the long term.
— High standards across Environmental, Social and
Governance (ESG) matters.
How we engage
— Twice yearly equity investor road shows in the UK and
USA by the CEO and CFO.
— One-to-one meetings, often combined with site visits,
enabling investors to view the business operations.
— Group meetings held at periodic investor conferences.
— Structured shareholder consultations on key
governancematters.
— Equity analyst briefings.
Actions and outcomes
— An added-value model that recognises the risks of a
cyclical housing market and operational complexities of
the sites Berkeley develops.
— A focus on financial strength, resilience and liquidity.
— Investment in land to maintain sufficient pipeline and
value-added development opportunities.
— Securing forward sales which underpins the upfront
investment in our regeneration sites.
— Disclosure of both financial and non-financial
information covering a range of ESG topics.
Key engagement activities this year
We have continued to run road shows led by the Executive
Chair, the CEO and CFO, held one-to-one meetings with
investors and attended investor conferences.
Link to Our Vision priorities
For further detail
see pages 42 to 56
Link to KPIs
Profit before tax
Pre-tax return on equity
Net cash
Net asset value per share
Cash due on forward sales
Future gross margin in land holdings
118 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT118 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Committee purpose and responsibilities
The key responsibilities of the Committee include:
— reviewing the structure, size and composition of
the Board and Board Committees and making
recommendations to the Board having regard to
succession planning and supporting diversity;
— evaluating the balance of skills, knowledge, experience
and diversity on the Board;
— leading the process for identifying and nominating
candidates for the Board; and
— led by the Chairman, the appointment and
management of an external consultant to undertake
the Board evaluation at least once every three years.
Meetings
The Committee met three times this year, as set out
on page 100.
5 September 2025
Committee composition and appointments
CFO succession
17 September 2025
CFO succession
27 February 2026
Board and Committees’ composition and
successionplanning
The Board of Directors presents its
Nomination Committee Report for
the year ended 30 April 2026.
Rob Perrins | Chairman Nomination Committee
Committee activities
Led by Rob Perrins, the
Committee considered CFO
succession and gave further
consideration to Board and
Committee composition, having
regard in particular to tenure,
independence and diversity, to
ensure a mix of skills, knowledge
and experience with a view to
Non-Executive Director
succession. This year the Board
evaluation was carried out
internally. Further details are set
out on page121 to 122.
Board and Committees’
composition and
successionplanning
Rob Perrins was appointed
Executive Chair and Richard
Stearn Chief Executive at the
conclusion of the 2025 AGM on
5 September 2025. Details of
the rationale and process for the
leadership change are set out on
pages 120 to 121.
The Board selected Richard
Stearn as Chief Executive
following a comprehensive
succession planning process. The
Board concluded that Richard
Stearn possesses the leadership
capabilities, strategic insight and
operational expertise necessary
to lead the Group at this stage of
its development.
Richard has held a number of
senior leadership roles within the
Group and has developed a deep
understanding of the Company’s
business model, culture and
long-term strategy. Through his
leadership responsibilities across
the organisation, Richard has
demonstrated a strong track
record of operational delivery,
disciplined capital allocation and
effective stakeholder engagement.
The Board believes that Richard
Stearn’s extensive knowledge
of the Group, together with his
significant knowledge of the
industry, positions him well to
drive execution of the Berkeley
2035 Corporate Strategy and the
Nomination Committee Report
Composition, Succession and Evaluation
119 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
Non-Executive Director tenure
0–3 years
Non-Executive Directors
4–8 years 8+ years
Executive Directors
4
5
8
10
30 Apr 2026
30 Apr 2026
0
0
30 Apr 2026
0 5 10
Board gender balance
Male Female
Board independence
Read more about Board
activities on pages 108 to 113
Responsible Business Strategy.
His appointment also supports
continuity of leadership and
reflects the Board’s commitment
to orderly succession planning.
Neil Eady was appointed as Chief
Financial Officer on 29 September
2025. The Nomination Committee
oversaw a rigorous selection
process, considering both
internal and external candidates.
The Board concluded that Neil
Eady’s depth of experience
within Berkeley, his familiarity
with the Group’s culture, systems
and business model, and the
quality of the relationships he
had established across the Group
made him the strongest candidate
for the role.
Richard Dakin and Barbara
Richmond were appointed as
Independent Non-Executive
Directors at the conclusion of the
2025 AGM on 5 September 2025
and 1 January 2026 respectively.
Richard’s long and distinguished
career in banking, capital markets
and real estate and Barbara’s
extensive housebuilding industry
expertise and strong listed
company background made
them excellent appointments.
For details of their appointment
process, please refer to the
Nomination Committee Report in
the 2025 Annual Report.
On 5 September 2025, Rob
Perrins was appointed Chairman
of the Nomination Committee,
Rachel Downey was appointed
a member of the Remuneration
Committee and Richard Dakin
was appointed a member of the
Audit Committee.
Following these appointments,
the Board is satisfied that the
leadership of the Company
possesses an appropriate balance
of skills, experience and industry
expertise to support the Group’s
long-term objectives.
Board composition dashboard
120 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
During the year, the
Senior Independent
Director led a
comprehensive
succession review.
After extensive
consideration, the
Board concluded
that the appointment
of Rob Perrins as
Executive Chair
represented the
strongest outcome
for Berkeley.
Appointment
of the
Executive Chair
Having overseen the foundations
of the next phase of the
Company’s strategy, Michael
Dobson stepped down from
the Board at the conclusion of
the Company’s AGM on
5 September 2025.
When considering succession,
the Board was very conscious
of the complexity of the current
operating environment in the
industry, the role of housing in
the Government’s growth agenda
and the importance of the current
executive team to maintaining
Berkeley’s unique business model
and culture to drive long-term
value for shareholders, while also
recognising the need to formulate
and execute a successful
succession strategy.
Rationale
The Non-Executive Directors
considered the alternatives and a
number of factors:
— The long-term, capital-
intensive nature of Berkeley’s
development model, which
requires the navigation of
multi-decade planning and
development cycles;
— Rob Perrins’ deep and
unrivalled knowledge of
Berkeley’s business, having
served as CEO since 2009
and as a director since
1994, and the continuity of
stakeholder relationships;
— The Board’s assessment
that Richard Stearn, as an
experienced CFO since
April 2015 with a thorough
understanding of the business
alongside extensive sector
knowledge, was fully ready to
assume the CEO role; and
— The Board’s confidence
that a robust Division
of Responsibilities and
appropriate governance
safeguards could be
implemented to manage
the combined nature of the
Executive Chair role.
Governance
The Board acknowledged that the
Code states that the roles of chair
and chief executive should not be
exercised by the same individual
and that a chief executive should
not become chair of the same
company. However, the Code
recognises that this is possible in
exceptional circumstances and
subject to the Board setting out
its reasons to all shareholders and
engaging in consultation.
The Company’s rationale was
provided in its announcement
on 20 June 2025 and was
further explained in the letter
to shareholders published in
response to the ISS Proxy Report
on 22 August 2025, available
at www.berkeleygroup.co.uk/
investors/corporate-governance.
Notably, the appointment
of Rob Perrins as Executive
Chair provided assurance to
key stakeholders, including
employees, investors, and
government partners, of
continuity in leadership at a time
of significant change. It resolved
succession in a way that retained
the Berkeley culture and values,
the importance of which is
recognised by shareholders and
other stakeholders alike.
At the same time, it brought
clarity to the future structure of
the senior leadership team and
paved the way for emerging
talent. The Board’s view is that
the appointment of Rob Perrins
as Executive Chair was an
exceptional but necessary step
to ensure continuity, stability
and long-term value creation.
Furthermore, it reflected
shareholder feedback and
supports the effective delivery
of Berkeley’s next phase of
strategic growth.
The Board also put in place
the following key governance
safeguards in connection with the
Executive Chair appointment:
— A formal Division of
Responsibilities between the
Executive Chair and the CEO
was published on 19 August
2025, clearly delineating their
respective responsibilities;
— The Senior Independent
Director plays an enhanced
oversight role, chairing any
discussions in which the
Executive Chair’s interests could
conflict and leading the annual
appraisal of the Executive Chair
independently;
— The majority of the Board
continues to comprise
Independent Non-Executive
Directors, ensuring robust
independent oversight of
executive management;
— The appointment of two new
Independent Non-Executive
Directors with extensive
relevant industry and plc
board experience; and
Nomination Committee Report continued
Composition, Succession and Evaluation
121 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
Board Evaluation
Approach
The Board performance review
was conducted by the Company
Secretary in accordance with the
Code through a series of one-to-
one meetings with the Directors.
All Directors were very helpful
and cooperative in making time
available for their interviews and
pre-interview preparation.
Overview
The Directors agreed:
— The Board is working well
together and their skillsets align
with the strategic objectives of
Berkeley.
— Roles and responsibilities
of the Directors are clearly
defined and understood and
the leadership of the Executive
Chair and the CEO is working
effectively.
— The Board struck the right
balance between strategic and
operational discussion.
— Board papers and decision
making are working
appropriately.
— The Committees were
acknowledged for working
effectively with excellent
feedback to the Board.
— Increased site visits over
the year were universally
welcomed as an essential way
of learning about the business
and engaging with the wider
workforce.
— The Directors acknowledged
the detailed review by
management of the Group’s
risk management and internal
controls framework during
the year as part of the
ongoing preparations for the
implementation of Provision 29.
— Directors discussed potential
deep-dive topics for FY27.
Progress against FY26 goals
The Board was satisfied that the
FY26 goals had been met:
— The new Non-Executive
Directors who had joined
during the course of the
year had been effectively
embedded.
— Enhanced and additional
site visits for Non-Executive
Directors as a group and
individually had been
welcomed.
— The implementation of the
Corporate Strategy had been
reviewed effectively. The
details of this review are set
out in the Strategic Report.
— The Board was satisfied with
management’s intended
approach to Provision 29 and
management and maintenance
of the risk management and
internal controls framework.
The details are set out on pages
80 to 81 of this report.
— The Remuneration Committee
operates entirely independently
of the Executive Chair in setting
executive remuneration, and
the Executive Chair’s own
remuneration is determined by
the independent Remuneration
Committee and disclosed
fully in the Directors’
Remuneration Report.
Shareholder consultation
process
In accordance with the Code,
the Board consulted major
shareholders on the proposed
leadership changes prior to the
appointments becoming effective.
Led by Rachel Downey (Senior
Independent Director) and
supported by Andy Kemp (Audit
Committee Chair and previously
Remuneration Committee
Chair), the consultation involved
engagement with institutional
shareholders representing
over 50% of Berkeley’s voting
share capital.
The Board confirmed, in its
Notice of Annual General
Meeting on 4 August 2025, that
the consultation process was
concluded and that the proposed
appointments would take effect
from the conclusion of the 2025
Annual General Meeting.
Executive Chair CEO
— Responsible for effective operation of the Board
and corporate governance, including strategy for
succession plans
— Implement and deliver the Corporate Strategy
(Berkeley 2035)
— Custodian of corporate culture — Chair divisional boards
— Oversee the development of the strategy — Develop the wider management team and people
strategy, ensuring succession plans are in place
— Senior external stakeholder and relationship
management:
— Central Government
— GLA and local government
— Shareholders
— Key relationship management:
— Corporate partners and advisors
— Investor Relations (shareholders and analysts)
— Banks
— Chair Executive Committee and mentor
Executive team
— Deliver the Responsible Business Strategy
(Our Vision)
— Approval of any corporate activity and land
acquisitions
— Effective use of corporate assets
122 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
FY27 Goals
The Board set the following goals
for FY27:
— Following the successful
embedding of the two new
Non-Executive Directors,
continue to develop a
succession plan for the key
Non-Executive Director roles
of Senior Independent Director
and the chairs of the Audit and
Remuneration Committees, to
ensure and manage continuity.
— Continue to monitor and
develop Executive succession
in the context of delivery of the
new operational plan.
— Reinforce execution of the
operational plan to deliver the
strategy in the context of the
volatile operating environment,
supported by appropriate
governance that enhances the
Group’s entrepreneurial yet
disciplined culture.
— Conduct deep dives that will
focus on key areas of risk and
opportunity.
Development
Ongoing training and
development is available to
all Directors. Newly appointed
Directors received a detailed
induction pack and training to
familiarise them with the Group
including individual site visits.
Board members receive regular
guidance and updates on
regulatory matters and the Group’s
corporate governance framework.
Non-Executive members of
the Audit and Remuneration
Committees receive briefings
from the Group’s auditor and
remuneration advisor respectively
to ensure that they remain up
to date with current regulations
anddevelopments.
All Directors have access to
advice from the Company
Secretary and independent
professional advisors, at the
Company’s expense, where
specific expertise is required in
the course of their duties.
Diversity and Inclusion
Berkeley strives to create a
positive environment for its
people, one that fosters respect,
support, wellbeing, safety and
inclusivity and continues to work
towards a workplace that is
representative of the areas and
communities in which it operates.
Berkeley is committed to equal
opportunities and aims to ensure
that all individuals receive
equal treatment, regardless
of age, disability, ethnicity,
gender, sexual orientation or
socio-economic, educational or
professionalbackground.
Recognising the benefits and
value that diversity in its broadest
sense brings to the Board, the
Board sets the tone for diversity
and inclusion across the business.
Below is a summary of the Company’s compliance with the Board’s
diversity targets as at 30 April 2026 (the chosen reference date used
for the purposes of UKLR 6.6.6(9)(a)).
Targets set by the UKLR 6.6.6(9)(a) Compliance as at 30 April 2026
At least 40% of the individuals on
the Board of Directors are women.
50% of the individuals
onthe Board of Directors
are women.
At least one of the senior Board
positions (Chair, Chief Executive,
Senior Independent Director, Chief
Financial Officer) is held by a woman.
The position of Senior
Independent Director
is held by a woman.
At least one individual on the
Boardof Directors is from a
minorityethnicbackground.
The Board currently
includes one Director
from an ethnically
diversebackground.
Noting the recommendations
of the FTSE Women Leaders
and the Parker Reviews, and the
targets set out in UK Listing Rule
(UKLR) 6.6.6(9)(a), the Board is
committed to sustaining a strong
balance of diversity, that reflects
the diverse range of perspective,
insight and challenge needed to
enable the Board to discharge
its duties and responsibilities
effectively, and to operate in a
way that supports the continued
development of a diverse and
inclusive culture across theGroup.
At 30 April 2026, female
representation on the Board
stood at 50%. The Group meets
the ethnic diversity target set by
the Parker Review, with one Non-
Executive Director identifying
as being from an ethnically
diversebackground.
Nomination Committee Report continued
Composition, Succession and Evaluation
123 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
In accordance with UKLR 6.6.6(9)(a), as at 30 April 2026, the numerical data on the gender identity
andethnic background of the Board and Group Executive Committee, which was taken directly from
therelevant individuals, is as follows:
Number
of Board
members
Percentage
of the Board
Number of senior
positions on the
Board*
Number in
executive
management
Percentage
of executive
management
Men 5 50% 3 5 62.5%
Women 5 50% 1 3 37.5%
Not specified/prefer not to say – – – – 0%
White British or other White (including
minority-white groups)
9 90% 4 8 100%
Mixed/Multiple ethnic group – – – – 0%
Asian/Asian British – – – – 0%
Black/African/Caribbean/Black British 1 10% – – 0%
Other ethnic group, including Arab – – – – 0%
Not specified/prefer not to say – – – – 0%
* Senior positions on Board refer to the Chairman, Chief Executive, Senior Independent Director and Chief Financial Officer.
Berkeley continues to help lead
the development of diversity and
inclusion within the construction
sector, bringing through a
generation of talented women
into senior positions within the
business. Across the Board and
Executive Committee, female
representation in the most senior
roles within the Group stands at
53.3% at 30 April 2026.
In accordance with Disclosure and
Transparency Rule 7.2.8AR, the
Board maintains the Board
Diversity Policy. It applies to
the Board and its Committees
and sets out the approach to
diversity in respect of Berkeley’s
Board of Directors and Senior
Management.
In accordance with the Board
Diversity Policy, the Nomination
Committee has due regard to all
aspects of diversity in considering
and determining the appropriate
balance of skills, experience,
knowledge and independence
to enable the Board to continue
to operate effectively in the best
interests of the Company.
During the year, the Board and its
Committees have complied fully
with the Board Diversity Policy.
Rob Perrins
Chairman
Nomination Committee
23 June 2026
124 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT124 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Introduction
The report has been prepared in accordance with the
requirements of the Corporate Governance Code 2024, the
Listing Rules, Disclosure Guidance and Transparency Rules 7.1
and 7.2 and the FRC Guidance on Board Effectiveness.
Details of the composition and experience of the Committee
can be found in the Directors’ biographies on pages 98 to 99 of
the Governance report and details of the key matters covered in
Committee meetings are summarised on the page opposite.
The Board is satisfied that the Audit Committee has sufficient
financial experience and competence.
Meetings
The Committee met four times during the year, as set out on
page 100. By invitation, the external auditor, Executive Chair,
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer were present at
all meetings, while the Head of Finance, Head of Risk and Group
Financial Controller were present at specific meetings during the
year. The Committee received reports on whistleblowing from the
Group’s Solicitor. In addition, the Chair of the Audit Committee
met with the Chief Financial Officer and the external auditor
ahead of each meeting and had the opportunity to meet with
those responsible for Internal Audit, as required.
I am pleased to present the Audit Committee
Report for the year ended 30 April 2026. This
report describes the work undertaken by the
Committee, including its consideration of the key
areas of estimation uncertainty underpinning the
Consolidated Financial Statements, its review
of the Group’s risk management and internal
control systems and its assessment of the external
auditor’s audit plan, strategy and independence.
Andy Kemp | Chair | Audit Committee
The Chair of the Audit Committee
approves fees for non-audit work
undertaken by the external auditor,
as permitted by the Company’s
policy on non-audit fees, and
presents a paper on such fees at
each relevant meeting.
Financial reporting
Ahead of the interim and full year
results announcements, the Chief
Financial Officer presented a report
on the consolidated financial results
of the Group, including the key
areas involving financial reporting
estimation uncertainty.
The Committee reviewed, prior
to their publication, the financial
disclosures in the Group’s Annual
Report and interim and year
end results announcements.
The Committee’s review
incorporated consideration of the
appropriateness of the relevant
accounting policies and financial
reporting estimates adopted
therein. The reports to the
Committee by the external auditor
were considered in reaching
its conclusions.
Financial Reporting Council
(FRC)
In March 2026, the Company
received a letter from the FRC
notifying that the Company’s
2025 Annual Report and
Accounts was subject to a
review by the FRC’s Corporate
Reporting Review team. The
Audit Committee considered the
findings from the FRC’s review. It
is pleasing that the FRC did not
take any further action in relation
to these accounts and no changes
to the reported numbers were
required. It raised several minor
disclosure points that have been
considered and addressed while
preparing this Annual Report
and Accounts.
Key sources of
estimationuncertainty
Key accounting areas involving
estimation uncertainty that were
considered by the Committee
during the year were:
Audit Committee Report
125 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
Cost of sales recognition
The Group recognises a cost of
sale on each property sold and
recorded in revenue by reference
to the forecast development
margin. This is an estimate of the
forecast profit percentage for a
development which, for the most
part, is established over multiple
financial years. The recognition
of cost of sale at a point in time
is dependent on an estimate of
future selling price, direct costs
and an allocation of site-wide
costs, including an appropriate
allowance for risk.
Consequently, the assessment of
a development’s margin evolves
over the development cycle in line
with the risk profile.
In addition, the Group’s particularly
complex, long-term regeneration
developments exhibit an inherently
higher degree of estimation
uncertainty given an exposure to
cross-cyclical market movements.
The Group applies an approach to
cost of sales allocation for these
sites whereby whole-site costs are
accelerated to the early stages
of the development to reflect
the greater uncertainty and the
evolution of risk over the life of
such developments.
Management undertook an
assessment of these risks and
development assumptions and
reported the conclusions of these
assessments, by exception, to the
Committee in the Chief Financial
Officer’s report prior to the
release of the Group’s interim and
year end results.
Following review of each paper,
the Committee concluded that it
was satisfied with the assumptions
and estimates adopted.
Post completion
developmentprovisions
The accounting for provisions
relies on management estimating
the quantum and timing of cash
outflows to settle any legal or
constructive obligations.
Key matters covered in Audit Committee meetings
October 2025
— KPMG’s report on the audit
plan and strategy for the year
ending 30 April 2026
December 2025
— Interim results for the period
ended 31 October 2025
— KPMG’s report on the interim
review period
— Approval of new audit partner
due to mandatory rotation
— Whistleblowing report
March 2026
— KPMG update report on the
audit strategy for the year
ending 30 April 2026
— Annual formal review of risk
management and internal
control systems
— Approach to Provision 29
— Internal audit report
— Review of the Company’s
tax strategy
June 2026
— Financial results for the year
ended 30 April 2026
— Going Concern and Viability
Assessment
— Tax report for the year ended
30 April 2026
— KPMG’s report on the
Company’s consolidated
results
— Assessment of fraud risk
— Internal audit report, including
approval of the audit plan for
the year ending 30 April 2027
— Auditor independence and
non-audit fees and services,
alongside an evaluation of the
annual audit process
— Review of the 2026 Annual
Report to ensure it is fair,
balanced and understandable.
The Group holds provisions for
post completion development
obligations in respect of the
construction of its portfolio of
complex mixed use developments
which are expected to be incurred
in the ordinary course of business,
based on historical experience of
the Group’s sites and current site-
specific risks, including matters
relating to building fire safety, but
which are uncertain in terms of
timing and quantum.
The basis for determining these
provisions was presented to the
Committee for its consideration.
The Committee reviewed the
relevant papers and discussed
the assumptions underlying this
determination with management
and the Group’s external auditor
and concluded that it was satisfied
that the assumptions and estimates
adopted were appropriate.
A table of movements in provisions
over the year is included in Note
2.17 to the Consolidated Financial
Statements.
Ongoing areas of focus
Areas of financial reporting focus
for the year included:
Investment property
The Committee continues to
review the valuation, accounting
treatment and relevant disclosures
of the Group’s Build to Rent
platform. The Group’s disclosure
in this respect is set out in Note
2.9 to the Consolidated Financial
Statements.
Going Concern and
ViabilityAssessment
The Committee reviewed the
assumptions and methodology
adopted in the Group’s Going
Concern and Viability Statement,
the period that the assessment
covered, and the sensitivity
analysis undertaken.
The Committee was satisfied
that the Going Concern basis
and the Viability Statement were
appropriate and recommended
their approval to the Board. The
Viability Statement can be found
on page 83 of the Strategic Report.
126 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Audit Committee Report continued
Consideration of climate change
Through review of reporting to
the Board and of TCFD disclosure
in the Annual Report, the
Committee concluded that there
was no material impact on the
financial reporting judgements
and estimates in the Consolidated
Financial Statements as a result of
climate change for the year ended
30 April 2026.
The Group’s disclosure in this
respect is set out in Note 1.3
to the Consolidated Financial
Statements.
Review of the Annual Report
The Committee reviewed the
Annual Report and, taking into
account the views of the external
auditor, concluded that, taken as
a whole, it was fair, balanced and
understandable and provided the
information necessary for users
thereof to assess the Group’s
corporate strategy and
financial performance.
Risk management
and internalcontrol
The Board has overall
responsibility for monitoring
the Group’s systems of risk
management and internal control,
ensuring that they comply with
the Code and the FRC’s Guidance
on Risk Management, Internal
Control and Related Business
Reporting, and for formally
reviewing and maintaining their
effectiveness on an annual basis,
but delegates this responsibility
to the Audit Committee.
The Group has processes and
procedures embedded within
its ongoing business activities
for identifying, evaluating and
managing its principal and
emerging risks. During the
year these were reviewed by
management as part of the
ongoing preparations for the
implementation of Provision 29.
The effectiveness of
InternalAudit
Internal auditors are in place at a
Group level and, as appropriate,
at a divisional level to provide
assurance on the effective
operation of the Group’s internal
control systems.
Reports summarising the
activities of the Group Internal
Audit function were presented at
the Committee meetings during
the year. These reports covered:
— a summary of the key findings
arising from the internal audits
undertaken;
— management response to
control findings and Internal
Audit’s follow-up review of
mitigating action;
— the outcome of other
operational review work
undertaken by the Group
Internal Audit function; and
— the internal audit plan for the
coming year for the approval of
the Committee.
The Group Risk Management
Report sets out, and the Board
monitors, the evolving nature of
risk appetite which is a key element
in determining the Group’s strategy
and is set out on pages 80 to 81 of
the Strategic Report.
With risk assessment and
management being an ongoing
dynamic process, it is embedded
within the Group’s procedures and
debated at each Board meeting.
Nonetheless, the Audit Committee
undertakes a formal review
annually on behalf of the Board,
which covers:
An assessment of the principal
and emerging risks
The Committee reviewed a paper
covering the Group’s risk appetite
in response to the prevailing
macro and operating environment
in which the Group operated
during the financial year. In that
context, it also reviewed the risks
reported in the narrative of the
Annual Report for the year ended
30 April 2026, which are set out
on pages 82 and 84 to 93 of the
Strategic Report.
Assessment of the Group’s
control processes to mitigate
these risks
The Group has five key components
to its internal control framework
and the Committee reviewed a
paper covering the assessment of
controls under each component
area for the year ended 30 April
2026 highlighted therein:
1) Environment and culture;
2) Controls over investment
decisions and delivery;
3) Internal financial and
operationalreporting;
4) Policies, procedures and IT
related security; and
5) Monitoring and challenge.
The Committee acknowledges
that internal control procedures
are designed to manage rather
than eliminate risk. They can
only provide reasonable, and
not absolute, assurance against
material misstatement or loss.
The Committee continued to
assess the implementation
and preparedness of the
Company to comply with the
requirements of Provision 29
of the 2024 Code, which is
applicable for the financial year
commencing 1 May 2026.
Management appraised the
Committee of the approach
to identifying Principal Risks,
and the identification and
mapping of the appropriate
corresponding material controls.
Management further set out
the testing procedures against
which these controls will
be measured against in the
upcoming financial year.
The Committee was satisfied
with management’s intended
approach and will continue
to oversee progress in this
area, including the results of
testing sets throughout the
year, in order that the Board
has sufficient evidence to
appraise and conclude on their
declaration of effectiveness at
the balance sheet date.
127 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
The Committee also
considered the internal control
recommendations reported by
the Group’s external auditor in
its reports to the Committee and
the Group’s response to such
recommendations.
The Committee was satisfied that
the scope, extent and effectiveness
of the Internal Audit function was
appropriate for the Group during
the year ended 30 April 2026.
External audit
Audit approach
KPMG presented its audit strategy
document to the Committee in
October 2025. This document
included an assessment of the key
audit risks and other areas of audit
focus, the scope of the audit work,
and updates in respect of regulatory
changes for the current year and
those anticipated in future years.
KPMG reported to the Committee,
ahead of the release of the interim
and year end financial results, on
its assessment of the Group’s key
areas of estimation uncertainty
which correlate to the key audit
risk areas, alongside other
findings arising from its work.
The external auditor has recourse
to the Non-Executive Directors
should it consider it necessary.
The Chair of the Committee
and the external auditor meet
regularly throughout the year
and, more formally, prior to each
Committee meeting.
After each Committee meeting
the Committee members met
with the external auditor without
management present.
Independence of
theexternalauditor
As part of its reporting to the
Committee, KPMG identified the
safeguards in place within its
internal processes and procedures
to protect the independence of
its audit.
To safeguard auditor
independence, the Committee
has a policy on the provision of
non-audit services by the external
auditor. In accordance with that
policy, the ratio of audit fees to
non-audit fees (the ‘ratio’) should
be no greater than 0.7:1, with a
target of lower than 0.5:1 in any
one year and in aggregate over
the previous three financial years.
The ratio for the year ended
30 April 2026 was 0.10:1, well
within this limit. The non-audit
fees related to:
— The interim review, which is
closely related to the annual
audit process;
— Provision of limited assurance
over the Group’s scope 1, 2 and 3
carbon emissions data contained
within the Directors’ Report on
pages 158 to 159; and
— Provision of limited assurance
on the Group’s compliance with
its Green Finance Framework.
Audit and non-audit fee disclosures
are set out in Note 2.4 to the
Consolidated Financial Statements.
Any departure from the ratio
will only be as a consequence of
transactional work and only where
such transactional work is non-
recurring. Where the Committee
considers it is right for the
external auditor to undertake such
non-recurring transactional work,
the Committee will ensure:
— that the nature of the work and
the basis for using the external
auditor shall be disclosed in the
Annual Report;
— that the work does not pose
any threat to the independence
and objectivity of the external
auditor; and
— that there is a presumption in
favour of using other firms to
provide transactional advice
unless such advice can only
be provided by the external
auditor on the grounds that:
— it is proprietary to them;
— it has pre-existing knowledge
and experience of a situation
which precludes the use of
alternative firms;
— the nature of the transaction
is such that the Group’s
auditor is the only practical
appointment; and
— it is at the discretion of the
Chair of the Audit Committee.
There is open dialogue between
the external auditor and the
Company’s management to
monitor any proposed non-audit
related instructions.
The Committee has concluded
that the auditor was independent
throughout the year ended
30 April 2026.
Appointment of KPMG
KPMG was first appointed as
the Group’s auditor for the
year ended 30 April 2014 by
way of a competitive tender. In
line with applicable legal and
regulatory requirements, the
Group conducted a competitive
tender process during 2023 which
culminated in the re-appointment
of KPMG as the external auditor
for the year ended 30 April 2024.
On completion of the audit for
the year ended 30 April 2026,
the Committee reviewed the
performance and effectiveness of
KPMG, with feedback sought from
management. Taking this review
into account, the Committee
resolved to propose KPMG’s re-
appointment as the Company’s
auditor at the 2026 Annual
General Meeting.
The Company confirms that
it is in compliance with The
Statutory Audit Services for Large
Companies Market Investigation
(Mandatory Use of Competitive
Tender Processes and Audit
Committee Responsibilities)
Order 2014, which requires the
Company to tender the Group’s
external auditor every ten years.
At present, the Company has no
plans to re-tender before 2033.
The Committee approved the
replacement of the KPMG Lead
Audit Partner effective from the
2027 financial year, following
mandatory partner rotation.
Andy Kemp
Chair, Audit Committee
23 June 2026
128 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT128 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Contents of the Directors’ Remuneration Report
— Annual Statement of the Chair of the Remuneration
Committee
— Remuneration at a glance
— Summary Directors’ 2025 Remuneration Policy
— Annual Report on Remuneration
— Employment at Berkeley
Meetings
8 May 2025
Consultation process for the new Remuneration Policy
Annual bonus and PSP target setting
30 May 2025
Consultation process for the new Remuneration Policy
New Remuneration Policy
Overview of Group pay and employment matters
17 September 2025
AGM Voting Response
Senior Management Remuneration including CFO
Vesting of the 2011 LTIP and the 2025 PSP Grants
27 February 2026
AGM Voting Response
Benchmarking
I am pleased to introduce our Directors’
Remuneration Report for the year
ended 30 April 2026.
Natasha Adams | Chair of Remuneration Committee
Committee purpose
and responsibilities
The key responsibilities include:
— Determine and agree with the
Board the broad policy for the
remuneration of the Executive
Chair, Executive Directors and
senior management.
— Review pay policies for the
wider workforce.
— Determine performance
conditions for the incentive
plans operated by the
Company and approve the
total annual payments made
under them.
— Determine all share incentive
plans for approval by the Board
and shareholders.
— Take into account the views
of shareholders and the wider
workforce when determining
outcomes under the directors’
remuneration policy.
— Ensure that the contractual
terms on termination, and any
payments made, are fair to the
individual and the Company
and that failure is not rewarded.
— Note annually the remuneration
trends and any major changes
in employee benefit structures
across the Company.
The Committee’s Terms of
Reference set out its full remit
and can be downloaded from the
Corporate Governance section
of the Berkeley website (www.
berkeleygroup.co.uk/investors/
corporate-governance).
The Committee met four times
this year and attendance is set
outon page 100.
Directors’ Remuneration Report
Annual Statement of the Chair of the Remuneration Committee
129 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
Decisions made in the year
The Committee determined the
following during the year:
— Reviewed and approved
the vesting of the tenth
and final 2011 LTIP tranche
in September 2025, taking
into account the extent to
which the relevant financial
and individual performance
conditions had been satisfied
and the application of the Total
Remuneration Cap.
— Implemented the new Directors’
Remuneration Policy (the ‘2025
Policy’) following shareholder
approval at the September
2025 AGM, including the
introduction of an annual
bonus and Performance Share
Plan (PSP).
— Approved the performance
measures and targets for the
FY26 annual bonus and
PSP awards.
— Granted the first annual PSP
awards under the 2025 Policy.
— Approved the remuneration
arrangements in connection
with the Board changes
announced during 2025.
— Reviewed the outcome of
the shareholder votes at the
2025 AGM in respect of the
Directors’ Remuneration
Policy, the Annual Report on
Remuneration and the approval
of the Performance Share Plan
Rules, noting the voting results
for each resolution.
Dear Shareholder,
I am pleased to introduce our
Directors’ Remuneration Report
for the year ended 30 April 2026.
At our AGM on 5 September
2025, shareholders approved the
2025 Directors’ Remuneration
Policy. I would like to thank
shareholders for their constructive
engagement throughout the
consultation process and for their
support at the AGM. Considering
the extensive shareholder
consultation undertaken (the
Committee engaged with
shareholders representing over
50% of voting capital through an
extensive consultation prior to
finalising the new Remuneration
Policy and conducted further
engagement in advance of the
AGM), and the level of support
received (c.77% of votes cast
in favour), the Committee
did not consider it necessary
to undertake further formal
consultation following the AGM.
Nevertheless, we place significant
value on ongoing dialogue with
shareholders and proxy advisers
and carefully reflected on the
feedback received in finalising
and implementing the new
framework. We remain committed
to maintaining open and
constructive engagement.
The Committee’s primary
focus during the year was the
implementation of the 2025
Policy and ensuring a smooth
transition from the previous
2022 Policy. The new framework
introduces a market-aligned
structure comprising an annual
bonus and annual awards under
the PSP, while retaining the strong
performance-based philosophy
that has long underpinned
remuneration at Berkeley.
Remuneration in FY26
Implications of Board
changes on pay
During the year, the Company
announced a number of
changes to the Board structure
which had implications for
the implementation of the
remuneration policy (as
highlighted in last year’s report).
— On 20 June 2025, it was
announced that Michael
Dobson would step down as
Chairman at the conclusion
of the 2025 AGM, and it
was proposed that subject
to consultation with major
shareholders led by the Senior
Independent Director, Rob
Perrins would be appointed
Executive Chair and Richard
Stearn appointed CEO with
effect from the conclusion of
the AGM.
— On 4 August 2025, following
consultation with major
shareholders, the Company
announced confirmation
that Rob Perrins would be
appointed as Executive Chair
and Richard Stearn would
be appointed CEO, at the
conclusion of the AGM.
— On 5 September 2025,
Rob Perrins was appointed
Executive Chair and Richard
Stearn was appointed CEO.
— On 29 September 2025, Neil
Eady was appointed CFO.
These Board changes and the
changes to the Policy had a
number of implications for the
implementation of the 2025 Policy
in 2026.
— On appointment as Executive
Chair, Rob Perrins continued
on a salary of £785,000 and
is eligible to participate in
the PSP, with a maximum
opportunity of 400% of salary.
Rob Perrins is not eligible to
participate in the annual bonus
for 2026, or in future years and
his Total Remuneration Cap was
£8.33 million for FY26.
130 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
— On appointment as CEO,
Richard Stearn’s salary
increased to £625,000 and
is eligible to participate in
the annual bonus and PSP,
with maximum opportunities
of 200% and 250% of salary
respectively. Richard Stearn’s
Total Remuneration Cap was
increased from £3.38m as CFO
to £5 million on appointment as
CEO, reflecting his expanded
responsibilities and market
positioning, and which was set
at a level broadly aligned with
the upper quartile of typical
actual CEO remuneration within
the FTSE 100.
— The in-role shareholding
requirements for Rob Perrins
and Richard Stearn were
unchanged at 400% of salary
to be achieved by 2027 and
1,000% of salary by 2032.
On appointment as CFO, Neil
Eady’s salary was set at £389,000.
Neil Eady is eligible to participate
in the annual bonus and PSP,
with a maximum opportunity of
150% of salary under each plan. In
determining these arrangements,
the Committee took into account
that this is Neil Eady’s first Board
appointment and first role as a
listed company CFO. The salary
and incentive opportunity have
therefore been positioned at an
appropriate entry level, reflecting
his experience while recognising
his strong track record within
the Group. The Committee expects
that, as Neil Eady develops further
in the role and demonstrates
continued impact at Board level,
his remuneration will be reviewed
over time to reflect his evolving
responsibilities, experience and
contribution. His shareholding
requirement has been set at 250%
of salary, to be achieved within
five years from appointment, rising
to 500% of salary after ten years.
The Total Remuneration Cap does
not apply to the CFO, reflecting
the fact that he was not eligible
to participate in the 2011 LTIP and
therefore does not present the
legacy considerations that led to
the introduction of the cap.
Annual bonus
FY26 was the first year in which
the annual bonus operated,
and in which the CEO and
CFO participated (but not the
Executive Chair). It is strongly
aligned to performance, measured
against targets of profit before
tax (PBT), operating margin,
and strategic objectives. Half, or
one-quarter where an Executive
has met their shareholding
requirement, of bonus payments
are used to acquire Berkeley
shares which must be held for
three years in line with the
2025 Policy.
The annual bonus outcome
for FY26 was first reviewed
on a formulaic basis against
the financial and strategic
performance measures. This
assessment would have
resulted in an outturn of 87.2%
of the maximum opportunity
for the Executive Directors.
However, further to discussions
with the Executive Directors,
the Committee considered
whether that outcome was
appropriate in the wider
context of the challenging
operating environment, the
business response set out in
the April Strategy Update and
the approach being applied to
remuneration across the Group.
Having considered these factors,
the Committee agreed, further
to these discussions, that the
formulaic outcome did not fully
reflect the broader context and
agreed to exercise its discretion
to reduce annual bonus payouts
to 75% of maximum opportunity.
The CFO’s bonus outcome is
therefore £258,700, pro-rated for
time in role. The Committee also
considered a separate proposal
from the CEO that in this year of
transition to the new remuneration
policy, the challenging operating
environment and the broader
approach to remuneration
across the Group, that his bonus
be reduced by a further 50%.
The Committee agreed to this
proposal. As a result, the CEO’s
annual bonus outcome was
further reduced from £880,000
representing 75% of the annual
opportunity to £440,000
equivalent to 38%.
Final vesting under the 2011 LTIP
September 2025 marked the
vesting of the tenth and final
tranche of the 2011 LTIP. The
Committee carefully reviewed
performance against the
cumulative return targets and the
cumulative ROE and cumulative
Profit before Tax financial targets
and confirmed they were achieved
in full. This tranche vested in full,
and no discretion was required
by the Committee other than to
apply the Total Remuneration
Cap, which continues to
provide an important safeguard
against excessive outcomes.
The conclusion of the 2011 LTIP
represents a step in transitioning
from the legacy one-off long-term
incentive structures (2011 LTIP and
LTOP) to the new annual bonus
and rolling PSP framework. The
Committee believes this approach
ensures continuity of incentive
and supports retention during
the evolution of our remuneration
arrangements.
FY26 PSP awards
Awards under the new PSP were
granted in September 2025 to the
Executive Directors, with vesting
linked to NAV per share growth,
cash generation and ROCE over
the 3 years FY26-FY28.
Implementation of Policy
in FY27
Base salary
Following the 2027 base salary
review, the Committee agreed
the following decisions for the
Executive Directors:
— Executive Chair
£785,000 (0% increase)
— Chief Executive Officer
£625,000 (0% increase)
— The salary of the CFO will be
considered by the Committee
later in the year.
Directors’ Remuneration Report continued
131 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
Financial performance of2025/26
— Net cash of £363 million
(2024/25: £337 million)
— ROCE of 13.8%
(2024/25: 16.5%)
— Pre-tax return on shareholders’ equity of 12.5%
(2024/25: 14.9%)
— Net asset value per share increased by 9% to £39.17
(2024/25: £35.95)
— Cash due on forward sales of £1.0 billion
(2024/25: £1.4 billion)
— Future anticipated gross margin in the land bank
of £6.4 billion
(2024/25: £6.7 billion)
— Profit before tax of £451.4 million
(2024/25: £528.9 million)
This compares to a general
workforce increase of 1.1%.
Annual bonus
The CEO and CFO will be eligible
to participate in the FY27 annual
bonus under which:
— the measures will remain the
same as the FY26 plan whilst
the weightings have been
adjusted to reflect the priorities
in the April Strategy Update.
Further detail is set out on
page 148.
— the Executive Chair is not
eligible to participate in the
annual bonus.
The Committee agreed further
to discussions with the Executive
Directors to approve a reduction
in the CEO's annual bonus
opportunity from 200% to 150%
of salary. The CFO's annual bonus
opportunity will remain at 150% of
salary.
PSP
The Executive Directors will
be eligible for the PSP in FY27
and the measures will continue.
However, the weightings will be
varied to those set out below in
line with the Group’s priorities:
— 45% NAV per share growth,
— 35% cash generation, and
— 20% ROCE over the 3 years
FY27–FY29.
The Committee agreed further
to discussions with the Executive
Directors to approve a reduction
in the FY27 PSP grant levels for
the Executive Chair and CEO to
reflect the April Strategy Update.
Accordingly, the Executive Chair’s
grant will reduce from 400% to
300% of salary and the CEO’s from
250% to 200% of salary. The CFO’s
grant opportunity will remain
unchanged at 150% of salary.
Further detail is set out on
page148.
White City Living
132 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT132 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Directors’ Remuneration Report continued
ESG performance of 2025/26
Awards under the RSP are subject to an ROE underpin and a discretionary assessment by the Committee
as to the Company’s progress towards its Our Vision 2030 priorities. This second underpin is tested at
the vest date, but the Committee reports on the tracking against these priorities in each annual Directors’
Remuneration Report. The Committee reviewed progress during the year, taking into account the following
aspects and noting the strong performance and leadership positions in these areas:
— rated as a top 5% company within S&P Global’s 2026 Sustainability Yearbook;
— an Industry ESG Leader and Industry Low Carbon Leader by Sustainalytics;
— an ‘AAA’ leading company by the MSCI ESG Rating;
— given ‘Prime’ status through the ISS STOXX ESG Corporate Rating;
— Berkeley was awarded a place on CDP’s prestigious ‘A List’ for both Climate Change and Water Security,
underlining the strength of our environmental strategy and long-term commitment to sustainability;
— Berkeley retained Gold membership of The 5% Club, with over 8% of direct employees in ‘earn and learn’
positions as graduates, apprentices or sponsored students within the year;
— 96% of completed homes have an Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) rating of at least B and an
average internal water efficiency rating of 100.9 litres per person per day (a 16% improvement on current
building regulation requirements); and
— achieved validation of new science-based targets (SBTs) to build on the 81% reduction in scopes 1 and 2
(market-based) GHG emissions already achieved since 2019 and published a Net Zero Transition Plan to
set out our pathway to become net zero by 2045.
Long-term Company performance
Berkeley’s ROE compared with the sector over the last 10 years illustrates the relative performance of
the Company:
2016/17
2017/18
Restated 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2025/26
10-year
average
Berkeley 41.1% 41.9% 27.9% 16.6% 16.5% 17.5% 18.7% 16.2% 14.9% 12.5% 22.4%
Sector highest 41.1% 41.9% 34.1% 32.3% 23.1% 27.1% 20.7% 16.2% 14.9% 12.5% 23.2%
Sector lowest 15.7% 11.0% 15.9% 15.0% 5.7% 13.9% 8.8% 9.3% 3.1% 3.4% 10.5%
Sector average*
(excl. Berkeley) 24.2% 23.3% 24.9% 23.8% 10.5% 17.7% 13.7% 12.8% 5.8% 6.2% 16.3%
* Sector includes Barratt Redrow, Bellway, Persimmon, Redrow, Taylor Wimpey and Vistry.
The performance over the last 10 years highlights Berkeley’s strategy to deliver long-term returns over
the cycle.
Conclusion
On behalf of the Committee, I would like to thank shareholders for their continued support and engagement
during the year. We regularly review the effectiveness of our remuneration policy and will engage with
shareholders where necessary to ensure its implementation reflects both good governance and commercial
best practice. The Committee is satisfied that the 2025 Policy:
— maintains a significant proportion of remuneration linked to long-term performance and shareholder
value creation;
— provides appropriate flexibility to incentivise delivery in a volatile UK housing market; and
— reinforces alignment between Executive Directors and shareholders through stretching performance
conditions, extended holding periods and robust shareholding requirements.
The Committee remains committed to ongoing dialogue with shareholders, and I look forward to your
support at the upcoming AGM on 11 September 2026.
Natasha Adams
Chair of Remuneration Committee
23 June 2026
133 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
133 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
Remuneration at a glance
What we paid Executive Directors in the year:
Executive Director £’000 Fixed pay
1
Annual bonus LTIP Total 2026
R C Perrins 851 – 7,498 8,349
R J Stearn 640 440 2,209 3,289
N Eady
2
256 259 – 515
1 Fixed pay includes benefits, which are not included in the Total Remuneration Cap. See page 138 for a full breakdown
2 From date of appointment
Read more on pages 134 and 138 to 141.
Remuneration Policy structure
Annual
bonus*
PSP
Cash
Shares
purchased
3-year holding period on
purchased shares
Shares
released
Shares
released
2-year holding
period on
vesting shares
PSP award
vests
FY
2027
2028
2029 2030
2031
2032
Performance
period
Performance period
* 50% paid in cash or 25% where shareholding requirement met.
The Executive Chair and CEO have met their shareholding requirements; the CFO has not yet met his shareholding requirement.
FY26 annual bonus
The performance outcome for the annual bonus was 87% of maximum.
Half, or one-quarter where an Executive has met his shareholding requirement, of bonus payments are used
to acquire Berkeley shares which must be held for three years.
Performance measure
Threshold
25% payout Actual/Achieved
Maximum
100% payout
Profit before tax £375m £465m
Operating margin 17% 19%
Net Promoter Score 60 80
Earn and Learn
(% of employees)
5% 10%
£451m
18.7%
78
8%
134 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Directors’ Remuneration Report continued
Executive Directors shareholdings
R C Perrins Executive Chair
Shares at 30/04/26 % base salary
5,369%
R J Stearn CEO
Shares at 30/04/26 % base salary
1,315%
N Eady CFO
Shares at 30/04/26 % base salary
25%
Looking ahead
Executive Directors’ remuneration for 2026/27
Fixed pay
Executive Chair salary £785,000
CEO salary £625,000
CFO salary £389,000*
Benefits package remains unchanged
Pension contribution of 6% of salary
*Subject to review during FY27
FY27 Annual bonus
— Maximum opportunity: Rob Perrins not eligible; Richard Stearn 150% of salary (reduced from
200% of salary in FY26); Neil Eady 150% of salary
— Performance metrics: 60% PBT; 20% operating margin; 10% Net Promoter Score; 10% ‘Earn
and Learn’
— Deferral: 50% of any earned bonus must be used to purchase shares, which will be held for three
years, or, if the Executive Director continues to maintain shareholdings above the required level,
25% of any earned bonus will be applied instead
FY27 Performance shares
— Annual grant: Rob Perrins 300% of salary (reduced from 400% in FY26); Richard Stearn 200% of
salary (reduced from 250% in FY26); Neil Eady 150% of salary
— Performance metrics: 45% NAV per share; 35% cash generation; 20% ROCE
— Two-year post-vesting holding period
Remuneration caps increased for inflation
— Rob Perrins £8.58 million, Richard Stearn £5.15 million, Neil Eady not applicable
Read more on
page 148
Read more on
page 148
Read more on
page 144
135 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
Summary 2025 Directors’ Remuneration Policy
The 2025 Remuneration Policy was approved by shareholders at the 2025 AGM, and full details of the 2025
Policy are set out on pages 135 to 146 of the 2025 Annual Report which can be found on the Group’s website
at www.berkeleygroup.co.uk/investors/annual-report.
A summary of the elements under the Remuneration Policy is provided below.
Executive Directors
Objective and link tostrategy Operation Maximum opportunity
Base salary
To recruit and retain Executive
Directors of the appropriate
calibre and experience to
achieve the company’s
business strategy
• Paid monthly in cash and reviewed
annually (effective 1 May) based on
role, skills and experience, general
salary rises to employees and
benchmarked against market.
• Individuals who are recruited or
promoted to the Board may, on
occasion, have their salaries set below
the targeted policy level until they
become established in their role.
• Any future salary increases will take
in-role performance into account
and increases awarded to the wider
workforce.
• The Total Remuneration Cap applies
to salary.
Benefits
To provide competitive levels
of employment benefits
• Benefits include a fully expensed
car or car allowance alternative, and
medical insurance.
• Levels are determined by market rate.
• The Total Remuneration Cap does
not apply to benefits.
Pension
To provide competitive levels
of retirement benefits.
• The Company provides either
a contribution to a pension
arrangement or a payment in lieu
of pension.
• In line with the wider workforce,
currently 6% of salary.
• The Total Remuneration Cap applies
to pension.
Annual bonus
To drive the short-term
strategy and recognise annual
performance against targets
which are based on business
objectives.
• Awards are based on Group annual
performance targets.
• 50% of any annual bonus will be paid
(net of tax) in cash and 50% of any
bonus (net of tax) will be used to
acquire shares which may not be sold
or transferred for a three-year period.
• For executives who have achieved
their shareholding requirement, the
proportion of bonus deferred into
shares is reduced to 25%.
• Subject to clawback and malus
provisions.
• Up to 200% of salary, depending on
experience and role.
• Where applicable, the Total
Remuneration Cap applies to bonus
awards at the point at which the
annual bonus is determined.
Performance Share Plan (PSP)
To provide long-term
retention and alignment of
Executive Directors’ interests
with shareholders.
• Grant of conditional share awards
which vest after three years, subject
to Company performance and
continued employment.
• The shares acquired upon vesting will
normally be subject to a two-year
holding period.
• Subject to clawback and malus
provisions.
• Up to 400% of salary in any financial
year, depending on experience
and role.
• Up to 300% of salary for any new
appointments to the Board.
• The Total Remuneration Cap applies
to PSP awards at vest.
136 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT136 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Directors’ Remuneration Report continued
Objective and link tostrategy Operation Maximum opportunity
Total Remuneration Cap
To achieve a balance between
the need to reward and
incentivise the Executive
Directors to implement the
company strategy and the
interests of other stakeholders
in the company.
• Limits the amount of total
remuneration that can be paid
each year.
• Increased annually broadly in line
with general inflation.
• FY27 annual total remuneration caps
of £8.58 million for the Executive
Chair and £5.15 million for the CEO.
• The CFO does not have a cap.
• The Committee will review whether a
cap applies to any new appointments
on a case-by-case basis.
Shareholding requirement
To ensure that Executive
Directors’ interests are aligned
with those of shareholders
over a longer time horizon and
encourage long-term share
ownership by the Executive
Directors.
In-post
Executive Chair and CEO:
• To be achieved by the later of
10 years from appointment and
6 September 2032. The interim
requirement should be achieved
by the later of five years from
appointment and 6 September 2027.
CFO and new appointments:
• Normally be met within 5 years
of appointments.
In-post
Executive Chair and CEO:
• 1,000% of salary to be achieved
by September 2032.
• 400% of salary to be achieved
by September 2027.
CFO:
• 500% of salary to be achieved
by September 2035.
• 250% of salary to be achieved
by September 2030.
New appointments:
• Set in line with the annual PSP
award level
Post-exit (all executives):
• Post-cessation shareholding
requirement of 100% of actual
shareholding (or requirement if
lower) for 2 years post-cessation.
Legacy arrangements
Ensures Berkeley can
continue to honour previous
arrangements
• Gives authority to honour any
previous commitments or
arrangements entered into with
current or former Executive Directors.
• In line with existing commitments
and arrangements.
Malus and clawback
Malus provisions apply to unpaid annual bonus and to unvested PSP awards. Under malus, unpaid annual
bonus and unvested PSP awards can be reduced (down to zero if considered appropriate).
Clawback is the recovery of payments under the annual bonus or vested PSP awards and may be effected,
among other means, by requiring the transfer of shares, payment of cash or reduction of other share awards
or bonus payments.
Malus and clawback can be operated up to four years following the start of the relevant bonus year for
bonuses and up to five years from the date of grant for PSP awards as set out in the Executive Directors’
contractual remuneration documentation. The Committee considers the timeframe over which clawback may
apply to be appropriate, as it reflects the period in which the Group’s processes and systems are likely to
identify any occurrence of the key trigger events.
Circumstances in which malus and clawback may be applied include:
— errors in assessing a performance condition or in the information, calculations or assumptions which
impacts upon the level at which an award was granted, vests or is released:
— conduct by a participant which results in or is reasonably likely to result in significant reputational damage
to the Company or censure by regulatory authority;
— misconduct or fraud;
Executive Directors continued
137 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
137 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
— significant corporate failure which has a material impact on the value of the Group (taken as a whole) or
the ability of the Group to continue normal operations; or
— any other circumstances that the Board considers to be similar in their nature or effect.
Application of the Remuneration Policy
The charts below provide an illustrative indication of the level of remuneration that might be earned by each
Executive Director under four performance scenarios, assuming all aspects of the policy vest in the year (and
that under the Maximum + 50% scenario that the share price has increased by 50% between the date of
grant and the date of vesting). In reality, as it is a three year plan, the first PSP vesting will not be included in
the single figure table until FY28. Accordingly, the remuneration for Executive Directors for FY27 will only
include salary, bonus and any vesting under the 2023 RSP award, which is yet to be determined.
Minimum Fixed elements of pay which comprise: FY27 salary, 6% of salary pension contribution; FY26
benefits as an estimate for FY27
On-target Fixed elements of pay as set out above, plus:
• 50% of the maximum pay-out under the annual bonus (nil for R C Perrins; 75% of salary for
R J Stearn; and 75% of salary for N Eady)
• 25% vesting under the PSP (75% of salary for R C Perrins; 50% of salary for R J Stearn; and 37.5%
of salary for N Eady)
Maximum Fixed elements of pay as set out above, plus:
• Annual bonus payout at maximum (nil for R C Perrins; 150% of salary for R J Stearn and 150% of
salary for N Eady)
• Full PSP vesting (300% of salary for R C Perrins; 200% of salary for R J Stearn and 150% of salary
for N Eady)
Maximum
+ 50%
As maximum above, plus 50% assumed share price growth over three-year PSP performance
period (and subject to the FY27 Total Remuneration Cap of £8.58m for R C Perrins and £5.15m for
R J Stearn. No cap applies for N Eady)
Rob PerrinsRichard StearnNeil Eady
Minimum
On-target
Maximum
Maximum + 50%
Minimum
On-target
Maximum
Maximum + 50%
£1,000k £2,000K £3,000k £4,000k £5,000k
£6,000k £7,000k
£8,000k£0k
Fixed pay
Annual Bonus
PSP
£851k
£683k
£1,440k
£3,206k
£4,384k
100%
59%
27%
19%
41%
73%
81%
100%
£1,464k
£2,870k
£3,495k
47%
24%
19%
32%
33%
27%
21%
43%
54%
£432k
100%
£870k
£1,599k
£1,891k
50%
27%
23%
33%
36%
31%
17%
37%
46%
Remuneration Cap
Remuneration Cap
£8,580k
£9,000k
Minimum
On-target
Maximum
Maximum + 50%
Remuneration Cap
Minimum
On-target
Maximum
Maximum + 50%
Remuneration Cap
£5,150k
138 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Non-Executive Directors
This section of the Report summarises the Remuneration Policy for the Non-Executive Directors.
Objective and link tostrategy Operation Maximum opportunity
Fees
To attract Non-Executive
Directors with the requisite
skills and experience to
contribute to the strategy of
the Company and to review its
implementation.
• Paid monthly in cash and reviewed
annually (effective 1 May) taking
into account workload, level of
responsibility and current market
fee rates.
• Each Non-Executive Director receives
a fee which relates to membership
of the Board and additional fees are
paid for chairing and membership of a
Committee.
• Any future fee increases will take
into account increases awarded to
the wider workforce.
• Limited by the Articles of
Association, currently of £1,000,000.
Shareholding requirement
Encourage long-term share
ownership by the Non-
Executive Directors
• Should be achieved within three years
of appointment.
• 100% of the net fee received.
Annual Report on Remuneration
This section of the Remuneration Report contains details of how the Company’s Remuneration Policy,
approved by shareholders at the AGM on 5 September 2025, was implemented for Executive Directors
during the financial year that ended on 30 April 2026.
Single total figure of remuneration (Audited)
The table below sets out the single total figure of remuneration and breakdown for each Executive Director
paid in the FY26 financial year. The components of the single figure for FY26 are aligned with the calculation
of the individual elements of remuneration for the purposes of the Total Remuneration Cap.
Executive
Director
£’000 Salary Pension
Annual
bonus
1
Total Remuneration
Benefits
5
Total
fixed
Total
variable
Total
LTIP
2
Cap
3
Actual
4
R C Perrins
6
FY26 785 47 – 7,498 8,330 8,330 19 851 7,498 8,349
FY25 597 36 n/a 7, 367 8,000 8,000 17 650 7, 367 8,017
R J Stearn
7
FY26 585 35 440 2,209 4,460 3,269 20 640 2,649 3,289
FY25 405 24 n/a 2,821 3,250 3,250 20 449 2,821 3,270
N Eady
8
FY26 230 14 259 – – 503 12 256 259 515
FY25 – – – – – – – – – –
Notes
1 50% of any earned bonus must be used to purchase shares, which will be held for three years, or, if the Executive Director continues
to maintain a shareholding above the required level, 25% of any earned bonus will be applied instead. The annual bonus was not in
operation for FY25.
2 The FY26 value represents the tenth and final tranche of the 2011 LTIP that vested on 30 September 2025 at a share price of £38.12
subject to the operation of the Total Remuneration Cap (see table on page 141 for details). Where the LTIP value would have been
greater without the Total Remuneration Cap, it is the capped amount which is payable and therefore disclosed in the single figure of
remuneration. The capped amount is equivalent to the Total Remuneration Cap less salary less pensions.
3 The Total Remuneration Cap limits the amount of total remuneration that has been earned over the financial year and is capable of
being paid out. Rob Perrins’ cap was £8m and increased to £8.33m in FY26 per the 2025 Remuneration Policy, Richard Stearn’s cap
was £3.38m for the period beginning on 1 April 2025 and was increased to £5m on his appointment to CEO on 5 September 2025;
the value shown in the table is the pro-rated Cap for FY26. Neil Eady is not subject to a Cap.
4 The Total Remuneration Cap operated for both the FY25 and FY26 financial years and where the remuneration would have been
greater without the Total Remuneration Cap, it is the capped amount which is payable and therefore disclosed in the single figure
of remuneration.
5 Benefits, which are not included in calculating the Total Remuneration Cap, include a fully expensed company car or cash allowance
alternative and medical insurance.
6 R C Perrins was appointed Executive Chair from 5 September 2025, previously CEO, he is not eligible to participate in the annual bonus.
7 R J Stearn was promoted to CEO from 5 September 2025, previously CFO.
8 N Eady was appointed to the Board as CFO from 29 September 2025. The figures above reflect Neil’s pay for the period during which
he was a director for FY26.
Directors’ Remuneration Report continued
139 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
Annual bonus outturn (Audited)
The measures for the annual bonus were aligned with the Company’s KPIs for the year. They comprised
80% based on financial metrics, consisting of 50% profit before tax and 30% operating margin.
A further 20% of the bonus was based on strategic metrics being Net Promoter Score (10%) and ‘Earn and
Learn’ (10%), an employee education-support measure (and measured as a % of employees as graduates,
apprentices or in sponsored training over recent years).
The outcomes against the annual bonus targets are set out below:
Performance measure Weighting
Threshold
25% payout
Maximum
100% payout
Actual
achieved
Payout %
(% of maximum opportunity)
Profit before tax 50% £375m £465m £451m 89%
Operating margin 30% 17% 19% 18.7% 89%
NPS 10% +60 +80 +78 92%
Earn and Learn 10% 5% 10% 8% 70%
Total outcome of annual bonus:
Executive
Maximum
opportunity
(% of salary)
Bonus payable
(% of
opportunity)
Bonus payable
(% of salary) Total bonus
R J Stearn
1
200% 38% 75% £440k
N Eady
2
150% 75% 113% £259k
Notes
1 Bonus pro-rated based on time in role as CFO and CEO.
2 Pro-rated from date of appointment.
3 R C Perrins is not eligible to participate in the annual bonus scheme.
The annual bonus outcome was first reviewed on a formulaic basis against the financial and strategic
performance measures. This assessment would have resulted in an outturn of 87.2% of the maximum
opportunity for the Executive Directors.
However, further to discussions with the Executive Directors, the Committee considered whether that
outcome was appropriate in the wider context of the challenging operating environment, the business
response set out in the April Strategy Update and the approach being applied to remuneration across
the Group. Having considered these factors, the Committee agreed, further to these discussions, that the
formulaic outcome did not fully reflect the broader context and agreed to exercise its discretion to reduce
annual bonus payouts to 75% of maximum opportunity.
The CFO’s bonus outcome is therefore £258,700, pro-rated for time in role.
The Committee also considered a separate proposal from the CEO that in this year of transition to the new
remuneration policy, the challenging operating environment and the broader approach to remuneration
across the Group, that his bonus be reduced by a further 50%. The Committee agreed to this proposal. As a
result, the CEO’s annual bonus outcome was further reduced from £880,000 representing 75% of the annual
opportunity to £440,000 equivalent to 38%.
50% of the net bonus payable to N Eady will be used to purchase shares which must be held for three years.
In accordance with the 2025 Policy, as R J Stearn has met his shareholding requirement, 25% of the net
bonus payable will be used to purchase shares which must be held for three years. Clawback and malus
provisions apply.
140 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Directors’ Remuneration Report continued
Long-term incentives (Audited)
Vesting of the tenth and final tranche of the 2011 LTIP
The tenth and final tranche of the LTIP was the sixth to be subject to the enhanced performance conditions
set out on pages 112 to 114 of the 2020 Report and Accounts. The following table sets these out, split
between Return Targets and Financial Targets:
Return Targets No element of the 2011 LTIP can vest unless the cumulative returns target has been met
through the delivery of the targeted returns during the financial year.
Performance Condition Detail Actual Performance
Cumulative
Return
Target returns in respect of the 12 months to
30September 2025: £284 million.
Cumulative return target since 2011: £2,529
million.
Actual returns made in respect of the
12months to 30 September 2025:
£284million.
Actual cumulative return since 2011: £2,529
million.
Vesting 50% of the 2011 LTIP tranche will be capable of
vesting at the 2025 vesting date and will vest
on the satisfaction of the Cumulative Return
performance condition. Where this performance
condition is not met 100% of the relevant
tranche due to vest on 30 September 2025 will
lapse.
This element of the award vested in full on
30September 2025.
Financial Targets Provided the Cumulative Return performance condition has been satisfied 50% of this tranche
under the 2011 LTIP is subject to the satisfaction of the following additional performance
conditions.
Cumulative ROE 30% of the tranche is subject to achieving a
cumulative pre-tax Return on Equity (ROE) of a
minimum of 15% (to be calculated commencing
1 May 2019).
Actual cumulative ROE of 16.6%.
Full vesting of the 30% of the tranche subject
to this performance condition.
Cumulative Profit
before Tax
20% of the tranche is subject the cumulative
Profit before Tax; to achieve the target in any
one year:
1. The Company needs to deliver Profit before
Tax of at least £500 million; or
2. The Company must be on track to deliver a
cumulative Profit before Tax of £3 billion in
the six years ending 30 April 2025.
The Company delivered a Profit before Tax
of £3.263 billion in the six years ending
30April2025.
Full vesting of the 20% of the tranche subject
to this performance condition.
Vesting of the 2011 LTIP Tranche on
30September 2025
100%
As detailed on page 128 of the 2021 Report and Accounts, the tranches of the 2011 LTIP which vest from
2021 onwards are subject to additional performance conditions based on the individual performance of the
Executive Directors. The Committee assessed the individual contribution of the Executive Directors and
determined that no adjustment to the formulaic outcome, as detailed in the table above, was appropriate.
141 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
The tenth and final tranche of the 2011 LTIP award vested in the year as follows. The number of options
released from the 2011 LTIP is limited to ensure the value of the Total Remuneration Cap for each individual is
not exceeded:
Cumulative
banked
options at
30/9/24
1
Net Total
Remuneration
Cap after fixed
pay
2
Options in
each annual
tranche for
2022 to
2025
3
Maximum
number
of banked
options
capable of
vesting
4
Actual
number
of options
capable of
vesting
5
Performance
measure and
outcome
Number
of options
vested after
performance
test
Value of gain
on options
vested
6
Lapsed
banked
options
7
R C Perrins 1,708,939 £7,497,900 590,904 1,708,939 228,476 See page 140
for performance
measures.
Vesting
outcome – 100%
228,476 £7,497,900 1,480,463
R J Stearn 68,759 £3,838,133 67,303 68,759 67,303 67,303 £2,208,683 1,456
Notes
1 This is the brought forward banked shares after the vesting on 30 September 2024.
2 The Total Remuneration Cap continues to limit the LTIP vesting at each vesting date. The Total Remuneration Cap operated for FY26
and where the 2011 LTIP value would have been greater without the Total Remuneration Cap based on the cumulative banked options
vesting in four equal tranches, it is the capped amount which is payable and therefore disclosed in the single figure of remuneration.
The Cap indicated above is that which was available at the time of the 2011 LTIP vesting (September 2025) after fixed pay for
FY26 but excluding the potential value of the FY26 annual bonus which itself was assessed against the Cap upon its determination
following year-end.
3 The banked options at 30 September 2021 vest in four equal tranches from September 2022 to September 2025, subject to the
application of the Total Remuneration Cap at each vesting.
4 This is the maximum number of options that could have vested up to the Total Remuneration Cap and as this is the final vesting
includes any rolled over banked options carried forward from previous tranches.
5 This is the maximum number of options that vested, being the lesser of (3) and (4)
6 This is the value of the options that vested, calculated using the opening share price of £38.12 on 30 September 2025 (the date the
options vested and became exercisable) less the exercise price of £5.30 per share.
7 All outstanding banked options lapsed following the vesting of the tenth tranche.
8 Each Executive Director exercised all the options that vested on 30 September 2025. Under the rules of the 2011 LTIP, after the
sale of shares to pay tax, only 10% of shares are permitted to be sold each year until 30 September 2025 at which point the sale
restriction falls away.
The Committee did not adjust the level of option vesting as a result of share price growth over the
performance period. It is an inherent feature of the 2011 LTIP that management and shareholders’ interests
are aligned based on Total Shareholder Returns (including share price growth) over the performance period.
The Committee did not exercise any other discretion in relation to the level of the option vesting other than
to apply the Total Remuneration Cap.
Performance Share Plan awards granted in the year
Following the approval of the 2025 Policy, Executive Directors were granted conditional share awards under
the PSP on 17 September 2025 as per below:
Executive
Value of award
(% of salary) Value of award
Number of
shares awarded
1
R C Perrins 400% £3,139,992 84,773
R J Stearn 250% £1,562,495 42,184
N Eady 150% £583,491 15,753
Notes
1 For the PSP awards, the face value of the shares has been calculated using the share price on the date of award (17 September 2025),
which was £37.04.
142 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Directors’ Remuneration Report continued
The performance measures and targets for the 2025 PSP awards are set out in the table below. The
performance period is the three-year performance period ending on 30 April 2028, and awards will vest,
subject to the satisfaction of the performance conditions, on the third anniversary of grant. Following
vesting, shares are subject to a further two-year holding period.
Weighting
Threshold
(25% vesting)
Maximum
(100% vesting)
Growth in NAV per share plus
dividends 45% 21.5% 27.5%
Net cumulative operating cash
generation before land payments
(FY26-28) 20% £1,300m £1,550m
ROCE (3-year average) 35% 10% 13%
Below threshold no portion of the award will vest. Awards vest on a straight-line basis between threshold and
maximum performance. Malus and clawback provisions apply at any time up to the fifth anniversary of grant.
Dilution
A maximum of approximately 19 million shares were approved by shareholders under the 2011 LTIP. The
actual number issued is significantly lower due to a combination of the Total Remuneration Cap, the
settlement of awards net of both the option price and participants’ tax obligations and leavers.
4,955,997 shares were issued under the 2011 LTIP from 2016 until the end of scheme in 2025; in total 4.9% of
the Company’s issued share capital as at the date of this report over a ten year period.
The Company intends to manage the level of dilution arising from the LTOP and PSP awards by
implementing net settling for tax and the exercise price where appropriate.
Non-Executive Directors single figure table (Audited)
The table below sets out the single total figure of remuneration and breakdown for each Non-Executive
Director. Non-Executive Directors do not participate in any of the Company’s incentive arrangements, nor do
they receive benefits.
Non-Executive
Director £’000
Basic fees Additional fees
1
Total fees
2026 2025 2026 2025 2026 2025
R Downey
2
88.5 88.5 8.4
b)c)
5.0 96.9 93.5
N Adams 72.5 72.5 15.0
a)
15.0 87. 5 87.5
E Adekunle 72.5 72.5 – – 72.5 72.5
R Dakin
3
47. 3 – 3.3
b)
– 50.6 –
A Kemp 72.5 72.5 20.0
a)c)
20.0 92.5 92.5
B Richmond
4
24.2 – – – 24.2 –
S Sands 72.5 72.5 5.0
b)
5.0 77.5 77. 5
Former Directors
M Dobson
5
141.0 400.0 – – 141.0 400.0
W Jackson
5
25.5 72.5 1.8
b)
5.0 27.3 77. 5
Notes
1 Additional fees represent fees paid for:
a) the role of Committee Chair;
b) membership of the Audit Committee;
c) membership of the Remuneration Committee.
2 R Downey’s basic fee includes the SID fee.
3 R Dakin was appointed to the Board from 5 September 2025.
4 B Richmond was appointed to the Board from 1 January 2026.
5 M Dobson and W Jackson stepped down from the Board on 5 September 2025.
143 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
Payments to past Directors (Audited)
Karl Whiteman, Justin Tibaldi and Paul Vallone stepped down from the Board on 8 September 2023. They
remain in their current operational roles and members of the Board of the Company’s immediate subsidiary.
Their outstanding 2011 LTIP, LTOP and RSP awards vest at their normal vesting dates and subject to
performance conditions and/or underpins as set out in previous annual reports. The tenth and final tranche
of the 2011 LTIP award vested on 30 September 2025 as to the following number of options: Whiteman
54,849 options; Tibaldi 19,933 options; Vallone 42,787 options. Each former Executive exercised all the
options that vested.
Payments for Loss of Office (Audited)
No payments were made in the year.
Directors’ shareholding and share interests (Audited)
The Company has a shareholding requirement for both Executive and Non-Executive Directors, linked to the
base salary or net fee they receive from the Company. Using the Company’s closing share price of £32.06 on
30 April 2026, compliance with the requirements was as follows:
Obligation
1
(% of salary)
Actual
shareholding as a
% of salary at
30 April 2026
Achievement at
30 April 2026
Executive Directors
R C Perrins
400%/1000% 5,369%
R J Stearn 400%/1000% 1,315%
N Eady 250%/500% 25% x
Obligation
2
(% of net fee)
Actual
shareholding as a
% of net fee at
30 April 2026
Achievement at
30 April 2026
Non-Executive Directors
R Downey
100% 107%
A Kemp 100% 166%
N Adams 100% 130%
E Adekunle 100% 89%
S Sands 100% 66%
R Dakin 100% 120%
B Richmond 100% 231%
Former Non-Executive Directors
3
M Dobson n/a 950%
W Jackson n/a 8,863%
Notes
1 A 1000% of salary requirement for the Executive Chair and CEO is to be achieved within the later of 10 years from appointment and
6 September 2032. An interim requirement equal to 400% of salary should be achieved within the later of 5 years from appointment
and 6 September 2027. The CFO has a 250% of salary requirement to be achieved within five years from appointment, rising to 500%
within ten years.
2 To be achieved within three years of appointment. The level of shareholding is inevitably impacted by share price fluctuations which
can move individuals above or below the threshold for periods of time.
3 The information for former Non-Executive Directors M Dobson and W Jackson is correct and tested as at 5 September 2025.
4 There have been no changes in the interests of the Directors from the end of the period under review to the date of this report.
144 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Beneficially
owned shares
1
PSP
awards
2
LTOP
options
3
RSP
awards
4
Total
interests held
Executive Directors
R C Perrins
1,314,739 84,773 1,000,000 49,785 2,449,297
R J Stearn 256,344 42,184 350,000 28,948 677,476
N Eady 3,075 15,753 25,000 – 43,828
Non-Executive Directors
R Downey
1,720 – – – 1,720
A Kemp 2,543 – – – 2,543
N Adams 1,878 – – – 1,878
E Adekunle 1,069 – – – 1,069
S Sands 843 – – – 843
R Dakin 1,000 – – – 1,000
B Richmond 926 – – – 926
Former Non-Executive Directors
M Dobson
22,969 – – – 22,969
W Jackson 40,000 – – – 40,000
Notes
1 Beneficial interests include shares held directly or indirectly by connected persons.
2 The PSPs may vest subject to the achievement of performance conditions.
3 LTOP options vest in five equal tranches between September 2026 and September 2030, subject to continued service, with a
holding restriction in place until at least 5 years from grant. The exercise price ranges from £48.50 to £58.50, and will be reduced in
proportion to dividends paid over the exercise period.
4 RSP awards vest after four years from grant subject to satisfaction of underpin conditions and continued service.
5 Correct as at 5 September 2025.
Comparison of CEO total remuneration and Total Shareholder Return against the market
The graph below shows the Company’s performance, measured by Total Shareholder Return (TSR), compared
with the performance of the FTSE 250, FTSE 100 and the FTSE All Share indices. The Company considers these
the most relevant indices for Total Shareholder Return disclosure required under the Regulations.
To give context to the total single figure levels of the CEO we have also included the single figure historical
outcomes from the table below onto the chart to demonstrate the clear alignment between shareholder
returns and the CEO’s single figure pay that results from the nature of the remuneration structure in place.
Directors’ Remuneration Report continued
Total Shareholder Return (Rebased)
300 30,000
20,000
10,000
25,000
15,000
5,000
0
200
250
150
2015/16
Chief Executive Single Figure
Berkeley FTSE 250 Index FTSE All-Share Index FTSE 100 Index
2019/202017/18 2021/222016/17 2020/212018/19 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2025/26
50
100
0
145 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
CEO pay in the last 10 years
The table below shows the remuneration of the CEO for each of the financial years shown in the graph above.
2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/ 24 2024/ 25 2025/ 26
R C Perrins
Perrins/
Stearn
1
Single figure of
remuneration £000
27,963 7,806 7,809 8,303 7,971 8,043 8,043 8,026 8,017 5,113
Annual bonus payout
2
(as a % of maximum
opportunity)
100% 100% 100% – – – – – – 38%
Multi-year incentive
vesting awards (as
a % of maximum
opportunity)
100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%
Notes
1 R C Perrins was CEO until 5 September 2025, following which R J Stearn became CEO. 2025/26 CEO remuneration reflects the
aggregate for their remuneration pro-rated to the period during which they held the role.
2 The 2025/26 number represents the bonus paid to R J Stearn as CEO.
Percentage change in Directors’ remuneration
The following table compares Directors’ pay (including salary, taxable benefits and annual bonus) with the
wider employee population. The Company considers the full-time employee population, excluding the Main
Board, to be an appropriate comparator group and the most stable point of comparison:
Base salary/fees Benefits Annual bonus
2026 2025 2024 2023 2022 2026 2025 2024 2023 2022 2026 2025 2024 2023 2022
Executive Directors
R C Perrins
1
31% 0% 0% 3.0% 3.5% 12% -34% -40% 1% 64% n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
R J Stearn
1
54% 0% 0% 3.0% 3.5% 0% -19% 4% 1% 1% n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
N Eady
2
n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Non-Executive Directors
R Downey
3
7.6% 0% 22.1% 3.1% 3.5% n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
N Adams 8.6% 0% 0% 3.1% 3.5% n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
E Adekunle 0% 0% 0% 3.1% 3.5% n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
R Dakin
4
n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
A Kemp 8.1% 0% 0% 3.1% 3.5% n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
B Richmond
5
n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
S Sands 0% 0% 0% 3.1% 3.5% n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Former Directors
M Dobson
6
-64.8% 0% 0% n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
W Jackson
7
-64.8% 0% 0% 3.1% 3.5% n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
Average
percentage for
employees
8
1.1% 3.5% 3.8% 6.2% 5.3% 2% -2% 0% 5% 4% -25% 8% -7% 2% 5%
Notes
1 R C Perrins was appointed Executive Chair and R J Stearn CEO on 5 September 2025. The percentage change for R J Stearn reflects
his appointment as CEO.
2 N Eady was appointed to the Board on 29 September 2025.
3 On appointment as Senior Independent Director on 8 September 2023, R Downey’s fee increased from £72.5k to £88.5k per annum.
4 R Dakin was appointed to the Board on 5 September 2025.
5 B Richmond was appointed to the Board on 1 January 2026.
6 M Dobson was appointed to the Board on 8 June 2022 and stepped down from the Board on 5 September 2025.
7 W Jackson stepped down from the Board on 5 September 2025.
8 The Company does not employ any staff. The data in respect of employees is therefore in relation to the Group (excluding the Board).
146 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Directors’ Remuneration Report continued
Pay comparisons
The following table provides the ratio of the CEO to that of the median, 25th and 75th percentile total
remuneration of full-time equivalent UK employees.
Year Method
1
25th percentile
pay ratio
Median
pay ratio
75th
percentile
2025/26 Option B 101:1 66:1 49:1
2024/25 Option B 165:1 107:1 70:1
2023/24 Option B 176:1 111:1 77:1
2022/23 Option B 189:1 123:1 77:1
2021/22 Option B 200:1 109:1 85:1
2020/21 Option B 189:1 119:1 85:1
2019/20 Option B 189:1 125:1 84:1
Notes
1 CEO pay ratio is determined by reference to representative employee data as at the financial year end.
The median pay ratio for 2025/26 is 66:1. The Company considers that the median pay ratio for 2025/26 is
consistent with the pay, reward and progression policies for the Company’s UK employees as a whole.
The Committee determined that it would be appropriate to use Option B of The Companies (Miscellaneous
Reporting) Regulations 2018, where the latest available gender pay gap data (i.e. from April 2026) was used
to identify the best equivalent for three Group UK employees whose hourly rates of pay were at the 25th,
50th and 75th percentiles for the Group. A full-time equivalent total pay and benefits figure for the relevant
financial year was then calculated for each of those employees. No adjustments (other than the approximate
up-rating of pay elements to achieve full time equivalent rates) were made and no components of pay have
been omitted. We believe this provides a clear and robust methodology to facilitate year-on-year reporting
whilst remaining simple and providing a reasonable estimate for employee pay at these levels.
The Committee is satisfied that the individuals identified within each relevant percentile appropriately
reflects the employee pay profiles at those quartiles, and each was remunerated in line with Berkeley’s
remuneration policies.
A small number of employees at either side of the quartile points identified from the gender pay gap data
were also considered, together with their corresponding full time equivalent total pay and benefits figures to
ensure that the employees identified at each of the three percentile points are reasonably representative of
each quartile.
The table below sets out the salary and total pay and benefits for the representative employees.
25th percentile Median 75th percentile
Salary 43,000 65,000 86,500
Total pay and benefits 50,671 77,750 104,271
147 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
Shareholders expect the CEO to have a significant proportion of his pay based on performance and paid in
shares. It is this element of his package which will provide any observed volatility in his remuneration when
comparing this on a year-to-year basis to the wider employee population. The Committee is comfortable
that the underlying picture is not one of a greater divergence of the CEO remuneration from employees,
i.e. excluding the volatility of long-term incentive arrangements, the relationship will be consistent.
There is likely to be significant volatility in this ratio year-on-year, and we consider that this is caused by
the following factors:
— Our CEO’s pay is made up of a higher proportion of incentive pay than that of our employees, in line with
the expectations of our shareholders. This introduces a higher degree of potential variability in his pay
each year, which will affect the ratio.
— The value of long-term incentives is disclosed in pay in the year it vests, which increases the CEO’s pay in
that year, again impacting the ratio for that year.
— Long-term incentives are provided in shares, and therefore an increase in share price magnifies the impact
of a long-term incentive award vesting in a year, reflecting alignment with shareholder value.
— We recognise that the ratio is driven by the different structure of the pay of our CEO versus that of our
employees, as well as the make-up of our workforce. This ratio varies between businesses even in the same
sector. What is important from our perspective is that this ratio is influenced only by the differences in
structure, and not by divergence in fixed pay between the CEO and the wider workforce.
— Where the structure of remuneration is similar, as it is for the Company’s most senior executives and the
CEO, the ratio will be much more stable over time.
— None of the lower quartile, median and upper quartile employees identified this year is a participant in the
2011 LTIP. If the value of the 2011 LTIP is excluded in the CEO pay ratio calculation, the ratios would be
as follows:
— To employee at the 25th percentile – 21:1
— To employee at the 50th percentile – 13:1
— To employee at the 75th percentile – 10:1
Relative importance of spend on pay
The table below sets out the relative importance of spend on pay in the 2024/25 and 2025/26 financial years
compared with distributions to shareholders.
2025/26 £m 2024/25 £m % change
Remuneration of Group employees (including Directors) 221 218 +1%
Distributions to shareholders by way of dividends and share buy-backs 233 381 -39%
Implementation of the Remuneration Policy in FY27
Salary
Base salary levels for 2026/27 will be as follows:
£000 FY26 FY27 % Increase
R C Perrins 785 785 0%
R J Stearn 625 625 0%
N Eady 389 389 0%
Salary increases awarded to employees throughout the Group were, on average, 1.1%. The salary for Neil Eady
will be further considered by the Committee later in the year and reported in next year’s report.
Benefits and pension
There is no change in benefits arrangements for FY27. Executive Director pension contributions are aligned
with the wider workforce at 6% of salary.
148 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Directors’ Remuneration Report continued
Annual bonus
In the context of the challenging operating environment and further to discussions with the Executive
Directors, the Committee agreed that a reduction in the CEO’s FY27 annual bonus opportunity from 200%
to 150% of salary would be appropriate. Neil Eady’s maximum opportunity remains at 150% of salary. Rob
Perrins is not eligible to participate in the annual bonus scheme. A proportion of any earned bonus will be
used to purchase shares to be held for three years.
For FY27 the following metrics will apply:
— 60% PBT;
— 20% operating margin;
— 10% net promoter score; and
— 10% ‘Earn and Learn’.
The annual bonus outturn will be assessed by the Committee at year end, taking into account performance
against the targets and the underlying performance of the business.
Performance Share Plan
In the context of the challenging operating environment and further to discussions with the Executive
Directors the Committee agreed that FY27 PSP grant levels should be reduced for the Executive Chair and
CEO. Accordingly, Rob Perrins’s PSP grant will reduce from 400% to 300% of salary and Richard Stearn’s
from 250% to 200% of salary. Neil Eady’s grant will remain unchanged at 150% of salary, with a three-year
vesting and two-year post-vesting holding period.
For the 2027 cycle, vesting will be based on the ranges as per the table below. In determining these ranges,
the Committee has considered internal and external projections, Berkeley’s performance verses the sector,
and taken account of the capital allocation framework of Berkeley 2035 and the BTR investment profile.
Weighting
Threshold (25%
vesting)
Max (100%
vesting)
Growth in NAV per share plus dividends 45% 15.5% 22.5%
Cumulative Cash (FY27-FY29) 35% £1.1bn £1.5bn
ROCE (3-year average) 20% 8% 12%
The PSP outturn will be assessed by the Committee at the end of the performance period, taking into
account performance against the targets and the underlying performance of the business.
Total Remuneration Cap
The Policy allows the Total Remuneration Caps to be reviewed annually in line with general inflation. The
Committee assessed the level of the Caps at the start of FY27 and determined that they would be increased
by 3%, in line with CPIH over FY26 (reflecting general inflation since the last Cap review) and for FY27 will be
as follows:
Total
Remuneration
Cap p.a. (£)
R C Perrins 8,580,000
R J Stearn 5,150,000
Neil Eady is not subject to a Total Remuneration Cap as he does not participate in the 2011 LTIP.
Non-Executive Directors
Non-Executive Director fee levels for FY27 are as follows:
— SID fee: £91k (increased by £2,500);
— Basic fee: £72.5k (no change);
— Additional fee for Chair of Committee: £17.5k (increased by £2,500);
— Membership of Committee fee: £5k (applies to all Committees).
149 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
The Committee’s remit
The Committee’s remit includes responsibility for setting and managing the remuneration of Berkeley’s
Senior Management, in addition to Executive Directors. The Committee’s focus is on determining the
Remuneration Policy and practices to ensure that the incentives operated by the Company align with its
culture and strategy.
The Committee also has oversight of wider workforce pay and policies and incentives, which enables it to
ensure that the approach to executive remuneration is consistent with those for the workforce. The Committee
is provided with additional information from the Company in order to carry out these responsibilities.
Who supports the Committee?
In determining the Executive Directors’ remuneration for the year, the Committee consulted with the
Executive Chair, R C Perrins, and the CEO, R J Stearn. No Director played a part in any discussion about their
own remuneration. The Company Secretary attended each meeting as Secretary to the Committee.
Ellason was appointed in 2023 by the Committee as its independent remuneration advisor. Ellason does not
provide any other services to the Company. Ellason is a member of the Remuneration Consultants Group
and the voluntary code of conduct of that body is designed to ensure objective and independent advice is
given to remuneration committees. Fees of £109,382 (FY25: £210,080) were paid to Ellason during the year
in respect of advice to the Committee on Directors’ remuneration. The Committee is comfortable that the
members of the advisory teams who provide remuneration advice have no connections with the Company or
its Directors that may impair their independence.
Shareholder support
The results of the shareholder votes on the 2025 Policy at the 2025 AGM and the 2025 Annual Report on
Remuneration at the 2025 AGM are set out below.
Votes For Votes Against Votes Withheld
2025 Policy 77.19% 22.8% 4,590,339
2025 Annual Report on Remuneration 93.87% 6.1% 4,589,445
Notes:
1 A vote withheld is not a vote in law and is not counted in the calculation of the votes for or against a resolution.
150 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Employment at Berkeley
Fairness, diversity and wider workforce considerations
Our employees are our strongest resource; it is important that we attract, develop and retain talented teams
at every level. Each operating company runs personal and professional development programmes and
ensures individuals receive the support and training that they need. In the section titled ‘Our Vision in action’,
on pages 52 and 54, we set out how we are working towards creating a positive working environment for our
people; one that fosters respect, support, wellbeing, safety and inclusivity.
The Committee seeks to ensure that pay is fair throughout the Company and makes decisions in relation to
the structure of executive pay in the context of the cascade of pay structures throughout the business.
Remuneration across the Company
The Committee carried out a review of key remuneration elements, policies and processes during the
2025/26 financial year, in order to ensure that wider workforce pay and policies were designed to support
the Company’s desired culture and values.
A process was adopted whereby the Committee receives a report periodically from the Company setting
out key details of remuneration throughout the Company. Clearly the levels of remuneration and the types
offered will vary across the Company depending on the employee’s level of seniority and role and also the
employee’s location. The Committee is not looking for a homogeneous approach; however, when conducting
its review, it is paying particular attention to:
— whether the element of remuneration is consistent with the Company’s remuneration principles;
— if there are differences, are they objectively justifiable; and
— whether the approach seems fair and equitable in the context of other employees.
Once the Committee has conducted its review of the wider workforce remuneration and incentives it
considers the approach applied to the remuneration of the Executive Directors and senior management.
In particular, the Committee is focused on whether, within the framework set out above, the approach to
the remuneration of the Executive Directors and senior management is consistent with that applied to the
wider workforce.
The following table sets out a summary of the information received by the Committee.
Element of remuneration Key areas reviewed and summary of findings
Base salary We set salaries to ensure that we remain competitive in the market and that levels
are appropriate considering roles and responsibilities of individuals. We have also
committed to ensuring that all our employees receive at least the voluntary Living
Wage as set by the Living Wage Foundation.
Pension We provide either a contribution to a pension arrangement or a payment in lieu of
pension. The maximum pension contribution for the wider workforce is 15% of salary;
the average is 6%, the level to which pension contributions for the Executive Directors
have been aligned since 31 December 2022.
Benefits We offer a range of benefits to our employees, including medical insurance.
Bonus Each business operates a bonus scheme for its employees. For senior employees (other
than Executive Directors) elements of the bonus plan are linked to the performance of
the relevant Division and are deferred to ensure performance over the long term and to
provide lock-in.
PSP A number of senior individuals participate in the PSP, on largely similar terms to those
for the Executive Directors.
Medium-term
incentives
In addition, medium-term incentive schemes are in place for some staff below Executive
Director level.
Directors’ Remuneration Report continued
151 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
The Committee is satisfied that:
— all employees are treated consistently and that the context and knowledge shared with the Committee is
a useful underpin to ensure that the Committee’s future decision making around Executive Director’s and
senior management’s pay supports fair and equal remuneration;
— salary increases for employees across the Company are being applied on an equitable basis, and that
average employee increases are considered when setting pay increases for both the Executive Directors
and Non-Executive Directors;
— our levels of variable pay continue to be linked to the achievement of stretching performance targets
and a strong governance framework, and all employees have the ability to share in the success of the
Company. The incentive approach applied to the Executive Directors aligns with the wider Company
policy on incentives, which is to have a higher percentage of at risk performance pay for more senior
employees and to increase the amount of incentive deferred, provided in equity and/or measured over the
longer term for more senior employees; and
— overall the wider workforce pay policies and practices for all employees are in line with the remuneration
principles, and the approach to Executive Director remuneration aligns with wider Company pay policy
and that there are no anomalies specific to the Executive Directors.
Gender pay gap reporting
The median pay gap for Berkeley is 27.2%.
We acknowledge the existence of a gender pay gap. Our mean and median gender pay gaps have decreased
by more than 20% since we began reporting in 2017.
As with much of our industry, the existence of a gender pay gap at Berkeley has continued to be influenced
by the overall shape of our workforce and our procurement model for construction labour. There are a lower
proportion of women in senior, higher paid roles, and more women occupying junior, lower paid roles. This
has been slowly improving year on year since we began reporting in 2017. In 2025, more women were in the
upper and upper middle pay quartiles compared to previous years, but there remains a higher proportion of
women than men in the lower quartile.
The proportion of women in our business varies across our teams, with a high or growing number of women
in a range of roles, including people functions, sustainability, sales and marketing and finance. However,
within the production areas of the business, women are still underrepresented; this includes our construction
teams on site, together with supporting functions such as commercial, procurement and health and safety.
We have had success at recruiting more women into graduate and apprentice roles in production and aim to
grow representation through our early careers development.
The structure of our workforce also impacts our bonus gap, with our senior leaders participating in the
Company’s Long-Term Incentive Plans. Over time it is anticipated that changes in the representation of
women at senior levels will influence bonus outcomes.
How we are improving diversity, fairness and equality across our organisation
We are committed to paying for performance equally and fairly and rewarding and retaining our best people.
We believe there are real benefits in ensuring diverse views, skills and perspectives which can lead to creative
thinking and more effective problem solving. We remain committed to creating an engaged and inclusive
environment and seeking to attract and retain a diverse workforce.
We are taking steps to increase the proportion of women within Berkeley as a whole, focusing on our
emerging talent programmes and appropriate representation within the recruitment process for experienced
roles. There is also the desire in the Group to promote from within and therefore provide increased
opportunities for career progression within the organisation and to more senior roles over the long term.
Central to this is the creation of a positive working environment — one that promotes respect, support,
wellbeing, safety, and inclusivity for all our people.
152 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Strong leadership to support diversity
Our Main Board meets the recommendations of the FTSE Women Leaders Review to help increase the
representation of women on boards. Currently 50% of Berkeley’s Board of Directors are female, including our
Senior Independent Director.
Each member of our Executive Director team is responsible for our approach to EDI and encouraging senior
leadership support within our autonomous businesses for all aspects of its implementation.
Setting the tone at a leadership level is key to creating a culture where everyone can thrive; our Leadership
Competency Framework clearly outlines the importance of our management staff in creating an inclusive
environment.
People policy and practices
We are an industry that relies on site presence for construction and sales and face-to-face working to
solve complex problems with a variety of stakeholders, often with early starts and tight deadlines to meet.
We operate core working hours to enable people to flex their day to meet their needs. Our autonomous
businesses implement agile working policies locally.
Employing best practice recruitment practices
Attracting and recruiting more women into our business is a crucial step in addressing the gender gap
and fostering a culture where everyone can thrive. We are actively enhancing our proactive outreach,
partnerships, and recruitment strategies to ensure that talented women see Berkeley Group as a place where
they can build successful careers and make a lasting impact.
Developing women in the business
All of our autonomous businesses run leadership programmes to develop the leaders of the future. Typically,
these include workshops on key skills together with mentoring and coaching. To supplement this, we are
committed to an industry-wide programme for women developed and run by The Circle Partnership.
To supplement leadership and management programmes run across the business, we have chosen to invest
in The Circle Academy for the third consecutive year. The Circle Academy is an industry-wide programme
established to increase and promote female talent retention in the built environment, through mentoring,
networking and leadership development. In 2025 13 women from Berkeley successfully completed the year-
long programme and 10 women have been selected to join the programme for 2026.
To extend the reach of programmes to empower and support the growth of women, in 2025 we piloted a new
programme, Elevate, designed by The Circle Partnership. This comprised five modules tailored specifically
for women covering content such as confidence and authenticity and communicating with impact.
Recognising the challenges faced by women in the Built Environment Sector
In 2025 we established a Group-wide Women’s Network to help drive inclusion initiatives throughout the
year and bring together existing networks from our autonomous businesses. The Group-wide network has
worked on a programme of themed sessions designed to engage a wider audience across the business.
These include events and awareness raising on the parenting juggle, women working on construction
sites and allyship, creating space for practical conversations about balancing responsibilities, visibility in
operational roles and the role colleagues at all levels can play in supporting inclusion.
Group-wide actions are supported by a range of local initiatives, from coaching and mentoring to buddy
programmes for maternity leavers that provide support both before and after leave. During the year we
have also taken steps to respond to the specific challenges women working on construction sites can face.
Initiatives include training on Imposter Syndrome and confidence-building workshops to support women
in developing self-belief and visibility, alongside awareness campaigns to reinforce a safe and inclusive
working environment.
International Women’s Day remains a key milestone in our annual calendar, providing a focal point for
engagement, reflection and action. In 2025 we held an event attended by more than 10% of our employees to
help raise awareness, share actions being taken and progress.
Directors’ Remuneration Report continued
153 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
Inspiring people to join the Built Environment Sector
Attracting and recruiting more women into our business is a crucial step in addressing the gender pay gap
and fostering a culture where everyone can thrive. Currently more than 40% of our employees are female,
and we continue to work towards attracting more women into both Berkeley and the wider industry to
support a balanced gender mix in the future.
Emerging talent schemes offer a key opportunity to increase the number of women; this year we saw 65% of
graduate positions filled by female candidates, a number of these in job roles traditionally filled by males in
our industry.
In line with our work in local communities, we have also continued to engage with young people in schools
to raise the profile of the industry and job roles available. Some of these activities have been designed
specifically to promote careers in the built environment to young women and girls, such as an annual Girls in
Construction work experience programme.
People Policy and Practices
We provide benefits which support women at different stages of their careers and lives, including wellbeing,
family-friendly and flexible benefits. In 2024 we enhanced our maternity leave policy (increasing fully paid
leave from three to six months) and we offer women a dedicated Menopause Plan through our healthcare
provider so women can get tailored support and feel confident about managing symptoms.
We operate core working hours to enable people to flex their day to meet their needs, supporting better
work-life balance and greater flexibility around personal and caring responsibilities. Our autonomous
businesses implement agile working policies locally. These are based on local employee and operational
needs, whilst recognising that we are an industry that relies on site presence for construction and sales and
face-to-face working to solve complex problems with a variety of stakeholders, often with early starts and
tight deadlines to meet.
We support the built environment sector’s Fairness, Inclusion and Respect (FIR) programme, led by the
Sustainability Supply Chain School, which provides training and resources to promote equality, diversity
and inclusion across the industry. Alongside more than 30 of our employees acting as FIR ambassadors,
we are also now represented on the FIR Steering Group, enabling us to share insight from our business and
contribute to shaping industry-wide approaches to fairness, inclusion and respect.
Signed on behalf of the Board
Natasha Adams
Chair of the Remuneration Committee
23 June 2026
154 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Directors’ Report
The Directors submit their
report together with the audited
Consolidated and Company
Financial Statements for the year
ended 30 April 2026.
For the purpose of Disclosure
Guidance and Transparency Rule
(DTR) 4.1.8R, the Directors’ Report
is also the Management Report
for the year ended 30 April 2026.
Certain information that is relevant
to this report, including information
required in accordance with the
Companies Act 2006, the Large
and Medium-sized Companies and
Groups (Accounts and Reports)
Regulations 2008 (as amended),
DTR 4.1.8R, DTR 7, UK Listing Rule
(UKLR) 9.3.3R and UKLR 6.6.1R can
be found in the Strategic Report
and the Corporate Governance
section of this Annual Report, as
detailed in each case below, and is
thereby incorporated by reference
into this report.
The following information in
respect of UKLR 6.6.1R can be
located in the following sections:
Information
Section in
Annual Report Pages
Capitalised
interest
Directors’
Report
157
Unaudited
financial
information
– N/A
Long-term
incentive
schemes
Remuneration
Report
128–153
Waiver of
Directors’
emoluments
Remuneration
Report
128–153
Allotments
of equity
securities
– N/A
Contracts of
significance
Directors’
Report
155, 157
Controlling
shareholders
Directors’
Report
157
Dividend
waivers
Directors’
Report
155
The Corporate Governance section
on pages 96 to 153 forms part of
the Directors’ Report.
The Company’s statement of how
it has applied the Principles of
the Code and complied with the
relevant provisions of the Code is
set out on page 97 of this report.
A full review of the business, its
development, performance and
position at the year end, together
with information in respect of
important events and likely future
developments, as required by DTR
4.1.8R, is set out on pages 18 to
33 of the Strategic Report and is
incorporated into this report
by reference.
Financial risk management
and financial instruments
The Company has not used
financial instruments during the
year under review. Information
in respect of the principal
financial and operating risks
and uncertainties relating to the
business, including the Group’s
financial risk management
objectives and policies and its
exposure to liquidity, foreign
currency, interest rate, price and
credit risks, is set out on pages 80
to 93 of the Strategic Report and
in Note 2.24 of the Consolidated
Financial Statements, and is
incorporated into this report
by reference.
Dividends
There were no dividends paid
during the year to 30 April 2026.
Post Balance Sheet events
On 30 April 2026, the Company
announced its intention to
implement a share buy-back
programme to enable the Company
to continue acquiring its ordinary
shares of 5.6110477936 pence each
from 1 May until 24 June 2026 for
a maximum total consideration
of £25 million. Through this share
buy-back programme, the Company
purchased through the market
for cancellation 686,543 ordinary
shares with a nominal value of
£38,522, which equates to 0.7%
of the issued share capital of the
Company, excluding treasury shares,
up to and including 19 June 2026.
The irrevocable consent continues
until 24 June 2026 with shares
expected to be purchased up to the
close of 23 June 2026, which are
expected to be cancelled after the
signing date. Details of purchases
since 19 June 2026 have been
disclosed in an RNS issued at the
date of this report.
After year end, the Group
extended the banking facilities
to £1.0 billion, comprising a £240
million Term Loan and a £760
million RCF. For further detail see
Note 2.27 to the Consolidated
Financial Statements.
Share capital
As at 30 April 2026, the Company
had 101,275,213 ordinary shares
of 5.6110477936 pence each in
issue (2025: 107,372,287 ordinary
shares of 5.6110477936 pence
each), which are fully paid.
During the year to 30 April
2026, and in accordance with
the authority provided by
shareholders at the 2024 and
2025 AGMs, the Company
purchased through the market for
cancellation 6,279,559 ordinary
shares with a nominal value of
£352,349.06, which equated
to 6.21% of the called-up share
capital of the Company, excluding
treasury shares and the aggregate
consideration was £233.0 million.
At the Company’s 2025 AGM,
the shareholders permitted the
Company to purchase its own
shares in the market up to a limit
of 10% of its issued share capital.
The Company has complied with
this permission throughout the
year to 30 April 2026 and up to
the date of this report.
At the Company’s 2025 AGM,
Directors were authorised to allot
shares or grant rights to subscribe
for, or convert, any security
into shares up to an aggregate
nominal amount of £1,819,040.87
and to allot shares for a similar
aggregate nominal amount for the
purposes of a rights issue.
155 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
The Directors were further
authorised to disapply statutory
pre-emption rights in connection
with certain allotments of shares.
These authorities will apply
until the conclusion of the 2026
AGM and it is proposed that
shareholders will be asked to
authorise the Directors to allot
shares and disapply statutory pre-
emption rights at the 2026 AGM.
Movements in the Company’s
share capital are shown in
Note 2.19 to the Consolidated
Financial Statements.
All the Company’s issued share
capital is publicly listed on the
London Stock Exchange.
All shares have full rights in the
Company with respect to voting,
dividends and distributions,
except as explained above in
respect of treasury shares. Further
information in respect of the
rights and obligations attaching
to the ordinary shares are set out
in the Articles.
No person has special rights
of control over the Company’s
share capital. There are no specific
restrictions on the size of a
shareholding or on the transfer of
shares, which are both governed
by the Articles and the prevailing
law. The Directors are not aware
of any agreements between
holders of the Company’s shares
that may result in restrictions on
the transfer of shares or on
voting rights.
Information on the Group’s share
option schemes is set out in Note
2.5 to the Consolidated Financial
Statements. Details of the Long-
Term Incentive Schemes and
Long-Term Incentive Plans for key
Executives are set out within the
Directors’ Remuneration Report
on pages 128 to 153.
Articles of Association
The business of the Company
shall be managed by the
Directors, who may exercise
all the powers of the Company
subject to the provisions of the
Company’s Articles of Association
(the ‘Articles’) and statutes, and
to such directions as may be
given by the Company in general
meeting by special resolution,
provided that no such direction
or alteration of the Articles shall
invalidate any prior act of the
Directors which would have been
valid if such direction or alteration
of the Articles had not been given.
The Articles set out the basic
management and administrative
structure of the Company. They
regulate the internal affairs of
the Company and cover such
matters as the issue and transfer
of shares, Board and shareholder
meetings, powers and duties of
Directors and borrowing powers.
In accordance with the Articles,
Directors can be appointed or
removed by shareholders in a
general meeting.
The Articles may only be
amended by special resolution at
a general meeting of shareholders.
The Articles are available on
the Company’s website (www.
berkeleygroup.co.uk/investors/
corporate-governance). Copies
are available by writing to the
Company Secretary and are
also open to inspection at
Companies House.
Directors
The Directors of the Company,
their profiles, details of their roles
and the Committees of which
they are members are detailed
on pages 98 to 99 and are
incorporated into this report by
reference. The Directors served
during the year under review
as indicated up to the date of
this report. Additionally, Michael
Dobson and William Jackson
served as Directors until they
stepped down from the Board at
the conclusion of the 2025 AGM.
The appointment and replacement
of Directors is governed by the
Company’s Articles, the Code,
the Companies Act 2006 and any
related legislation.
The Company, by ordinary
resolution, or the Directors may
from time to time appoint a
Director to fill a casual vacancy
or as an additional Director. Any
Director so appointed shall hold
office only until the next AGM
and shall then be eligible
for reappointment.
The Articles require Directors to
submit themselves for re-election
every three years. However, in
accordance with UK Corporate
Governance Code, each of the
Directors is subject to annual re-
election at the AGM and is being
unanimously recommended by all
the other members of the Board.
The interests of the Directors and
their connected persons in the
share capital of the Company and
its subsidiaries are set out on page
144. At 30 April 2026 each of the
Executive Directors was deemed
to have a non-beneficial interest
in 57,388 (2025: 46,062) ordinary
shares held by the Trustees of the
Berkeley Group Employee Benefit
Trust (EBT). The shares held in
the EBT rank pari passu with all
other shares in issue. However, the
Trustees of the EBT have waived
entitlement to dividends until
further notice and has agreed not
to vote on any shares held in the
EBT at any general meeting.
There were no contracts of
significance during, or at the end
of, the financial year in which
a Director of the Company is,
or was, materially interested,
other than those set out in
Note 2.28 to the Consolidated
Financial Statements, the
contracts of employment of the
Executive Directors, which are
terminable within one year, and
the appointment terms of the
Non-Executive Directors, which
are renewable annually and
terminable on one month’s notice.
Directors’ indemnities
The Company maintains Directors’
and officers’ liability insurance
which provides appropriate cover
for legal action brought against
its Directors.
156 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Directors’ Report continued
The Company’s practice has always
been to indemnify its Directors in
accordance with the Company’s
Articles and to the maximum
extentpermitted bylaw.
Qualifying third-party indemnities,
under which the Company has
agreed to indemnify the Directors,
were in force during the financial
year and at the date of approval
of the Financial Statements, in
accordance with the Company’s
Articles and to the maximum
extent permitted by law, in
respect of all costs, charges,
expenses, losses and liabilities
which they may incur in or about
the execution of their duties
for the Company, or any entity
which is an associated company
(as defined in Section 256 of the
Companies Act 2006), or as a
result of duties performed by the
Directors on behalf of
the Company or any such
associated company.
Annual General Meeting
The Company’s AGM will
take place at 11.00 a.m. on 11
September 2026. Details of
the AGM and arrangements for
engagement with shareholders
will be set out within the Notice
of Meeting.
In accordance with the FRC
Guidance on Board Effectiveness,
the Company arranges for the
Annual Report and Accounts
and related papers to be posted
to shareholders so as to allow
at least 20 working days for
consideration prior to the AGM.
At the AGM, voting on all
resolutions will be by proxy voting
and the results of the AGM will
be announced to the Stock
Exchange shortly after the close
of the meeting. They will also
be made available on the
Company’s website.
The terms and conditions of
appointment for the Non-
Executive Directors, which set out
their expected time commitment,
in addition to the service contracts
for the Executive Directors, are
available for inspection during
normal business hours at the
Company’s registered office.
Ordinarily, these are also available
for inspection at the AGM.
The Directors are responsible for
preparing the Annual Report and
the Group and Parent Company
Financial Statements in accordance
with applicable law and regulations.
Company law requires the
Directors to prepare Group
and Parent Company Financial
Statements for each financial year.
Under that law they are required
to prepare the Group Financial
Statements in accordance
with UK-adopted international
accounting standards and
applicable law and have
elected to prepare the Parent
Company Financial Statements in
accordance with UK accounting
standards and applicable law,
including FRS 101 Reduced
Disclosure Framework.
Under company law the Directors
must not approve the Financial
Statements unless they are
satisfied that they give a true and
fair view of the state of affairs of
the Group and Parent Company
and of the Group’s profit or loss
for that period. In preparing
each of the Group and Parent
Company Financial Statements,
the Directors are required to:
— select suitable accounting
policies and then apply
them consistently;
— make judgements and
estimates that are reasonable,
relevant, reliable and prudent;
— for the Group Financial
Statements, state whether
they have been prepared in
accordance with UK-adopted
international accounting
standards;
— for the Parent Company
Financial Statements, state
whether applicable UK
accounting standards have
been followed, subject to any
material departures disclosed
and explained in the Parent
Company Financial Statements;
— assess the Group and Parent
Company’s ability to continue
as a going concern, disclosing,
as applicable, matters related
to going concern; and
— use the going concern basis of
accounting unless they either
intend to liquidate the Group or
the Parent Company or to cease
operations, or have no realistic
alternative but to do so.
The Directors are responsible for
keeping adequate accounting
records that are sufficient to
show and explain the Parent
Company’s transactions and
disclose with reasonable
accuracy at any time the financial
position of the Parent Company
and enable them to ensure
that its Financial Statements
comply with the Companies Act
2006. They are responsible for
such internal control as they
determine is necessary to enable
the preparation of Financial
Statements that are free from
material misstatement, whether
due to fraud or error, and have
general responsibility for taking
such steps as are reasonably
open to them to safeguard
the assets of the Group and to
prevent and detect fraud and
other irregularities.
Under applicable law and
regulations, the Directors are
also responsible for preparing
a Strategic Report, Directors’
Report, Directors’ Remuneration
Report and Corporate Governance
Statement that complies with
that law and those regulations.
The Directors are responsible for
the maintenance and integrity
of the corporate and financial
information included on the
Company’s website. Legislation in
the UK governing the preparation
and dissemination of Financial
Statements may differ from
legislation in other jurisdictions.
In accordance with Disclosure
Guidance and Transparency
Rule (‘DTR') 4.1.16R, the financial
statements will form part of the
annual financial report prepared
under DTR 4.1.17R and 4.1.18R.
157 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
The auditor’s report on these
financial statements provides
no assurance over whether the
annual financial report has been
prepared in accordance with
those requirements.
Substantial shareholders
Number of
ordinary
shares held
1
% of
voting
rights
1
The latest notifications received by the
Company from shareholders in respect of
their interests, pursuant to DTR 5, as at
30 April 2026 are as follows:
First Eagle 11,464,697 12.02%
BlackRock
5,439,765 5.76%
Silchester
4,852,320 5.09%
Causeway
4,793,049 5.01%
R C Perrins
2,848,658 3.04%
1 The number of ordinary shares held
and percentage of voting rights is as
stated by the shareholder at the time
of notification.
Between 30 April 2026 and the
date of this report:
— Artisan Partners notified the
Company on 22 June 2026
pursuant to DTR 5 of a holding
of 9,422,361 shares and 10.2%
voting rights; and
— BlackRock notified the
Company of changes pursuant
to DTR 5 that resulted in a
notification on 22 June 2026 of
a holding of 5,573,482 shares
and 6.02% voting rights.
Political donations
The Group did not make any
political donations or incur any
political expenditure (2025: £nil)
during the year.
Capitalised interest
No interest has been capitalised
by the Group (2025: £nil) during
the year under review.
Significant agreements
Pursuant to the Companies Act
2006, the Company is required
to disclose whether there are any
significant agreements that take
effect, alter or terminate upon a
change of control.
Change of control provisions are
included as standard in many types
of commercial agreements, notably
bank facility agreements and joint
venture shareholder agreements,
for the protection ofboth parties.
Such standard terms are included in
Berkeley’s bank facility agreement
which contains provisions that give
the banks certain rights upon a
change of control of the Company.
In addition, the Company’s share
schemes contain provisions
which take effect upon change of
control. These do not entitle the
participants to a greater interest
in the shares of the Company than
that created by the initial grant of
the award. The Company does not
have any arrangements with any
Director or employee that provide
compensation for loss of office
or employment resulting from
a takeover.
Stakeholder engagement
The Company recognises the
importance of good supplier,
customer and other relationships
to the overall success of the
business and manages dealings
with stakeholders in a fair,
consistent and transparent manner.
The Company’s s172(1) Statement
on page 78 of the Strategic
Report sets out further details
ofhow the Directors have:
— engaged with employees;
— had regard to employee
interests and the effect of
that regard, including on the
principal decisions taken by the
Company during the year; and
— had regard to the need to
foster the Company’s business
relationships with suppliers,
customers and others, and the
effect of that regard, including
on the principal decisions taken
by the Company during
the year.
Employee engagement
The Group’s policy of operating
through autonomous subsidiaries
has ensured close consultation
with employees on matters
likely to affect their interests.
The Group is committed to the
continuation and strengthening
of communication lines with all
employees. Further information
is provided on page 52 of the
Strategic Report and page 115 of
the Corporate Governance Report.
The Group has in place an
Equality and Diversity Policy
Statement, an Employee Policy
and Equal Opportunities Policy
in addition to Sexual Harassment
and Workplace Bullying and
Harassment Policies which aim
to ensure that all employees,
potential employees and
other individuals receive equal
treatment (including access to
employment, training, career
development and opportunity
for promotion) regardless of
their age, disability, gender
reassignment, marriage or civil
partnership, pregnancy and
maternity, race, religion or belief
(including lack of belief), sex and
sexual orientation.
Sustainability
The Group is committed to being
a responsible and sustainable
business which thinks about
the long term and creates
positive environmental, social
and economic impacts. These
aspects are considered in the
Group’s approach to managing its
operational activities and in the
homes and places it develops.
The Group has an integrated
responsible business strategy:
Our Vision. Our approach to
sustainability underpins the
Climate & Nature and Places &
Communities priority topic areas.
Information on Our Vision can be
found within the Strategic Report
and on the Group’s website.
The Directors have ultimate
responsibility for sustainability
within the Group. The Our Vision
and Sustainability Board, which
meets monthly to set strategic
direction and review performance,
consists of the Chief Executive,
the Chief Financial Officer, the
Chief Operating Officer,
the Group Executive for
158 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Responsible Business and the
Group Head of Sustainability.
Dedicated operational
practitioners work throughout
the business to ensurethat
sustainability is incorporated into
daily activities.
Group Sustainability Standards
cover our activities, supported
by detailed procedures within
a Sustainability Management
System (SMS).
Scopes 1 and 2 greenhouse
gas emissions and
energyconsumption
The Group has reported on
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
for which it is responsible and the
energy use associated with these
GHG emissions, as required under
the Large and Medium-sized
Companies and Groups (Accounts
and Reports) Regulations 2008,
as amended by the Companies
Act 2006 (Strategic Report and
Directors’ Report) Regulations
2013 and the Companies
(Directors’ Report) and Limited
Liability Partnerships (Energy and
Carbon Report) Regulations 2018.
The emissions and energy
consumption disclosed are
aligned to the Group’s financial
reporting year; are based on
the operational boundary of the
Group covering regional offices,
development sites, sales suites,
international offices, Build to Rent
(BTR) buildings and business
vehicle travel; include 100% of
joint venture emissions for these
activities as applicable; and are
considered material to
the business. They have the
following parameters:
— Scope 1: direct emissions from
natural gas consumed for
office, sales and development
site activities; biodiesel HVO
(Hydrotreated Vegetable Oil),
diesel, petrol and liquefied
petroleum gas (LPG) purchased
directly for development site
activities; and travel (business
and other travel where
expensed) in Company owned
and Company leased vehicles
Directors’ Report continued
utilising conventional fuels
as an energy source. Fugitive
emissions from refrigerants are
also included.
— Scope 2: indirect emissions
from electricity and heat
consumed for office, sales,
development site and BTR
landlord activities; and travel
(business and other travel
where expensed) in Company
owned and Company leased
vehicles utilising electricity as
an energy source.
The Group has reported both
location-based and market-based
emissions for scope 2, with the
market-based emissions taking
into account Berkeley’s purchase
of Renewable Energy Guarantees
of Origin (REGOs) to certify that
100% of UK electricity is from a
renewable source (i.e. solar, wind
or hydropower).
Emissions intensity ratios have
been calculated using the floor
area of legally completed homes
and commercial space during the
year (including our joint ventures),
plus the floor area of homes
completed for Berkeley Living.
The Group creates homes
and neighbourhoods across
London, Birmingham and the
South of England. As a result,
the majority of emissions and
energy consumption are UK-
based. Global emissions and
energy consumption result
from electricity usage in eight
international offices.
In addition to the emissions
reported in the table on page 159,
in 2026 biogenic CO
2
(considered
‘outside of scopes’) amounted to
2,633 tCO
2
.
UK Government Environmental
Reporting Guidelines 2019
have been used as the basis for
disclosures. UK Government GHG
Conversion Factors for Company
Reporting and International
Energy Agency conversion factors
have been used to convert raw
data units into GHG emissions and
energyconsumption.
The Directors confirm that
reported GHG emissions and
energy consumption have
been prepared in accordance
with the Group’s established
reporting criteria, are free
from material misstatement
and have been presented in a
manner that provides relevant,
reliable, comparable and
understandableinformation.
Further details on our
methodology for reporting
emissions and energy
consumption can be found in
our established reporting criteria
available at www.berkeleygroup.
co.uk/sustainabilitydisclosures.
We continue to implement
initiatives to reduce energy
consumption and emissions. This
year we shared our first action
plan update in compliance with
the Energy Savings Opportunity
Scheme (ESOS), highlighting
progress made in addressing
out of hours energy use
through the use of enhanced
energy monitoring, real-time
consumption alerts, master
switches and settings, and
awareness campaigns.
Newly installed solar photovoltaic
(PV) arrays at Eastbrook Village
and Hartland Village have helped
power their site office and welfare
activities. We have also moved
two regional offices out of fossil-
fuelled buildings into all-electric
spaces. A Group Standard
has been introduced this year
requiring the use of sustainably
sourced biodiesel HVO
(Hydrotreated Vegetable Oil)
for all direct diesel fuel purchases.
The use of this alternative fuel
has reduced scope 1 emissions
by 604 tCO
2
e in the year
compared to an equivalent
use of fossil diesel.
159 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
Unit
2026 2025
Total UK
Global
(excluding
UK) Total UK
Global
(excluding
UK)
Scope 1 emissions tCO
2
e 459
A
459 – 582 582 –
Scope 2 (location-based) emissions tCO
2
e 3,394
A
3,217 177 4,445 4,246 199
Scope 2 (market-based) emissions tCO
2
e 314
A
137 177 314 115 199
Scopes 1 and 2 (location-based)
emissions tCO
2
e 3,853
A
3,676 177 5,027 4,828 199
Scopes 1 and 2 (location-based)
emissions intensity
tCO
2
e/
100sqm
1.10 – – 1.57 – –
Scopes 1 and 2 (market-based)
emissions tCO
2
e 773
A
596 177 896 697 199
Scopes 1 and 2 (market-based)
emissions intensity
tCO
2
e/
100sqm
0.22 – – 0.28 – –
Energy consumption associated
with scope 1 emissions MWh
4,135
A
4,135 – 4,658 4,658 –
Energy consumption associated
with scope 2 emissions MWh
18,764
A
18,430 334 21,087 20,723 364
Energy consumption associated
with scopes 1 and 2 emissions MWh
22,899
A
22,565 334 25,745 25,381 364
A
2026 information has been separately subject to limited assurance by KPMG LLP. Further details of the assurance provided in 2026,
including the independent assurance report and our methodology for reporting emissions, can be found at www.berkeleygroup.
co.uk/sustainabilitydisclosures
5,027
tCO
2
e
896
tCO
2
e
87% of our energy
consumption is
from renewable
sources
Energy Consumption
by Fuel Type
Energy Consumption
by Activity Type
GHG Emissions
by Scope
Scope 1
Biodiesel HVO 10%
Vehicle Travel 4%
Natural Gas 3%
Diesel, LPG and Petrol 1%
Scope 2
Purchased Electricity – UK 76%
Purchased Heat 4%
Purchased Electricity
– Global exc UK
1%
On-site Generated Renewable
Energy
1%
Electric Vehicle Travel 0%
Development Sites 74%
Divisional Offices 11%
Sales Suites
11%
Vehicle Travel
4%
BTR Buildings
0%
Location-based
Scope 1 12%
Scope 2 88%
Market-based
Scope 1 59%
Scope 2 41%
87% of our energy
consumption is from
renewable sources
3,853 tCO
2
e
773 tCO
2
e
74% of energy
consumption is a result of
construction activities
Renewable energy sources
160 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Directors’ Report continued
Independent auditor and
disclosure of information
to auditor
Each of the persons who is a
Director at the date of approval of
this Annual Report confirms that:
— so far as the Director is aware,
there is no relevant audit
information of which the
Company’s auditor is
unaware; and
— the Director has taken all the
steps that he/she ought to have
taken as a Director in order to
make himself/herself aware of
any relevant audit information
and to establish that the
Company’s auditor is aware of
that information.
This confirmation is given
and should be interpreted in
accordance with the provisions
of Section 418 of the Companies
Act 2006.
Going concern
The Group’s business activities
together with the factors likely
to affect its future development
performance and position are set
out in the Strategic Report. The
financial position of the Group,
its cash flows, liquidity position
and borrowing facilities are all
described in the Trading and
Financial Review on pages 31
to33.
The Directors have assessed the
business plan and future funding
requirements of the Group over
the medium-term and compared
these with the level of committed
loan facilities and existing cash
resources.
As at 30 April 2026, the Group
has net cash of £363.3 million and
total liquidity of £1.6 billion when
this net cash is combined with
banking facilities of £800 million,
(which expire in February 2029)
and £400 million listed Green
Bonds (which mature in August
2031). Furthermore, the Group
has cash due on forward sales
of £1,006 million, a significant
amount of which covers delivery
for the next 18 months.
After year end, the Group
extended the banking facilities
to £1.0 billion, comprising a
£240 million Term Loan and
a £760 million RCF. See Note
2.27 to the Consolidated
FinancialStatements.
In making this assessment,
consideration has been given
to the uncertainty inherent in
future financial forecasts and
where applicable, reasonable
sensitivities have been applied
to the key factors affecting the
financial performance of the
Group. The Directors have a
reasonable expectation that the
Group has adequate resources to
continue in operational existence
for not less than 12 months
from the date of these Financial
Statements. For this reason, it
continues to adopt the going
concern basis of accounting
in preparing its Consolidated
FinancialStatements.
By order of the Board
Victoria Mee
Company Secretary
The Berkeley Group Holdings plc
Registered number: 5172586
23 June 2026
161 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT
Directors’ responsibility statement
Each of the Directors confirms that, to the best of each person’s
knowledge:
— the Consolidated Financial Statements, prepared in accordance
with the applicable set of accounting standards, give a true and
fair view of the assets, liabilities, financial position and profit
or loss of the Company and the undertakings included in the
consolidation taken as a whole;
— the Company Financial Statements, which have been prepared
in accordance with United Kingdom Accounting Standards,
comprising FRS 101, give a true and fair view of the assets,
liabilities, financial position and results of the Company; and
— the Strategic Report, together with the Directors’ Report,
includes a fair review of the development and performance of
the business and the position of the Group, together with a
description of the principal risks and uncertainties that it faces,
including those that would threaten its business model, future
performance, solvency or liquidity.
For and on behalf of the Board
R J Stearn
Chief Executive
N L Eady
Chief Financial Officer
23 June 2026
162 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT162 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT162 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Financial Statements
Pages
162–234
163 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
163 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Grand Union,
Brent
Grand Union is one of London’s most
ambitious brownfield regeneration
projects, breathing new life into a 22-acre
derelict industrial estate in Alperton,
within the London Borough of Brent.
Once cut off from its surroundings and
dominated by disused warehouses
and infrastructure, the site is now
being transformed into a thriving
canalsidedestination.
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
164 | Independent Auditor’s Report
180 | Consolidated Income Statement
180 | Consolidated Statement
of Comprehensive Income
181 | Consolidated Statement
of Financial Position
182 | Consolidated Statement
of Changes in Equity
183 | Consolidated Cash Flow Statement
184 | Notes to the Consolidated
Financial Statements
226 | Company Balance Sheet
227 | Company Statement
of Changes in Equity
228 | Notes to the Company
Financial Statements
233 | Five Year Summary
234 | Financial diary
234 | Registered office and advisors
164 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
KPMG LLP’s Independent Auditor’s Report
To the members of The Berkeley Group Holdings plc
1. Our opinion is unmodified
In our opinion:
— the financial statements of The Berkeley Group Holdings plc give a true and fair view of the state of the
Group’s and of the Parent Company’s affairs as at 30 April 2026, and of the Group’s profit for the year then
ended;
— the Group financial statements have been properly prepared in accordance with UK-adopted international
accounting standards;
— the Parent Company financial statements have been properly prepared in accordance with UK accounting
standards, including FRS 101 Reduced Disclosure Framework; and
— the Group and Parent Company financial statements have been prepared in accordance with the
requirements of the Companies Act 2006.
What our opinion covers
We have audited the Group and Parent Company financial statements of The Berkeley Group Holdings plc
(“the Company”) for the year ended 30 April 2026 (FY26) included in the Annual Report, which comprise:
Group Parent Company (The Berkeley Group Holdings plc)
Consolidated Income Statement, Consolidated Statement
of Comprehensive Income, Consolidated Statement of
Financial Position, Consolidated Statement of Changes
in Equity, Consolidated Cash Flow Statement and notes
1 to 2.28 to the Group financial statements, including the
accounting policies in notes 1 to 2.28.
Company Balance Sheet, Company Statement of
Changes in Equity and notes C1 to C2.11 to the Parent
Company financial statements, including the accounting
policies in notes C1 to C2.11.
Basis for opinion
We conducted our audit in accordance with International Standards on Auditing (UK) (“ISAs (UK)”) and
applicable law. Our responsibilities are described below. We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained
is a sufficient and appropriate basis for our opinion. Our audit opinion and matters included in this report are
consistent with those discussed and included in our reporting to the Audit Committee (“AC”).
We have fulfilled our ethical responsibilities under, and we remain independent of the Group in accordance with,
UK ethical requirements including the FRC Ethical Standard as applied to listed public interest entities.
165 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
2. Overview of our audit
Factors driving
our view of
risks
Our risk assessment considers the Group’s operations, the
macro-economic environment and other external factors
which impact the judgements and estimates made by the
Group. Having considered these external factors, we have
identified the same key audit matters as in the prior year.
Following the introduction of an annual bonus arrangement
for FY26 based on in year results we have added the risk of
fraud to our costs of sales recognition and post completion
development provisions Key Audit Matters.
Cost of sales is subject to estimation uncertainty as it is
dependent on the Group’s estimate of future sales prices
and land and build costs, including an allowance for risk.
However, the risk has not been significantly impacted by
changes in the macro-economic environment during FY26.
Post completion development provisions are estimates based
on historical experience of liabilities arising on completed
developments and have a high level of estimation uncertainty.
There have been no significant changes in the macro-
economic environment or regulatory framework during the
year that would materially affect these estimates. As a result,
the provisions remain broadly stable.
Recoverability of the Parent Company’s investment in
subsidiaries remains our focus in the audit of the Parent
Company, The Berkeley Group Holdings plc, due to its
materiality in the context of the Parent Company’s financial
statements.
Key Audit Matters Vs FY25 Item
Cost of sales
recognition
4.1
Post completion
development
provisions
4.2
Recoverability of the
Parent Company’s
investment in
subsidiaries
4.3
Audit
committee
interaction
During the year, the AC met four times. KPMG is invited to attend all AC meetings and are
provided with an opportunity to meet with the AC in private sessions without the Executive
Directors being present. For each Key Audit Matter, we have set out communications with the AC
in section 4, including matters that required particular judgement for each.
The matters included in the Audit Committee Chair’s report on pages 124 and 125 are materially
consistent with our observations of those meetings.
Our
independence
We have fulfilled our ethical responsibilities under, and we
remain independent of the Group in accordance with, UK
ethical requirements including the FRC Ethical Standard as
applied to listed public interest entities.
We have not performed any non-audit services during
FY26 or subsequently which are prohibited by the FRC
Ethical Standard.
We were first appointed as auditor by the directors for
the year ended 30 April 2014. KPMG were reappointed as
external auditors in FY24 following a competitive tender
process. The period of total uninterrupted engagement is
for the 13 financial years ended 30 April 2026.
The Group engagement partner is required to rotate every
five years. As these are the fifth set of the Group’s financial
statements signed by Anna Jones, she will be required to
rotate off after the FY26 audit.
Total audit fee £1.7m
Audit related fees
(including interim
review)
£0.1m
Other services £0.1m
Non-audit fee as a
% of total audit and
audit related fee %
5%
Date first appointed 27 November
2013
Uninterrupted audit
tenure
13 years
Next financial period
which requires a
tender
2034
Tenure of Group
engagement partner
5 years
166 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Materiality
(Item 6 below)
The scope of our work is influenced by our view of
materiality and our assessed risk of material misstatement.
We have determined overall materiality for the Group
financial statements as a whole at £21.4m (FY25: £25.0m)
and for the Parent Company financial statements as a
whole at £14.5m (FY25: £14.5m).
Consistent with FY25, we determined that Group profit
before taxation remains the benchmark for the Group
as the users of the financial statements will be primarily
interested in the profitability of the Group and its ability to
generate returns for shareholders. As such, we based our
Group materiality on Group profit before taxation, of which
it represents 4.7% (FY25: 4.7%).
Materiality for the Parent Company financial statements
was determined with reference to a benchmark of
Parent Company total assets of which it represents
0.7%(FY25:0.7%).
Materiality levels used in our audit
 FY26 £m  FY25 £m
25.0
18.8
14.5
14.5
6.0
1.3
1.0
21.4
16.0
14.5
14.5
9.0
Group Group Materiality
GPM Group Performance
Materiality
HCM Highest Component
Materiality
PLC Parent Company Materiality
LCM Lowest Component
Materiality
AMPT Audit Misstatement
PostingThreshold
Group scope
(Item 7 below)
We have performed risk assessment procedures to
determine which of the Group’s components are likely
to include risks of material misstatement to the Group
financial statements, what audit procedures to perform at
these components and the extent of involvement required
from our component auditors to address those risks.
Of the Group’s 16 (2025: 16) reporting components,
we identified 5 (2025: 5) as quantitatively significant
components and 1 (2025: 3) as requiring special audit
consideration owing to Group risks related to cost of sales
recognition and post completion development provisions.
1 (2025: 1) component was selected for audit procedures
relating to significant borrowings contributing to specific
risks of material misstatement (RMMs) of the Group
financial statements.
The components within the scope of our work accounted
for the percentages illustrated opposite.
In addition, for the remaining components for which we
performed no audit procedures, we performed analysis at
an aggregated Group level to re-examine our assessment
that there is not a reasonable possibility of a material
misstatement in these components.
We consider the scope of our audit, as communicated to
the Audit Committee, to be an appropriate basis for our
audit opinion.
Coverage of Group financial
statements
Our audit procedures covered 100%
of Group revenue.
We performed audit procedures
in relation to components that
accounted for 86% (FY25:93%) of
Group profit before tax and 98%
(FY25:98%) of Group total assets..
KPMG LLP’s Independent Auditor’s Report continued
To the members of The Berkeley Group Holdings plc
 2026
 2025
 2026
 2025
 2026
 2025
Group
Revenue
86%
Group
Total assets
Group profit
before tax
93%
100%
100%
98%
98%
Group
HCM
LCM
GPM
PLC
AMPT
167 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
The impact of
climate change
on our audit
In planning our audit, we considered the potential impact of climate change on the Group’s
business and its financial statements.
The Group’s core activities of designing, building, and selling new homes is a carbon intensive
process. This includes developing large-scale regeneration projects to transform mainly
brownfieldsites into new homes and communal spaces by using heavy machinery to demolish
existing structures and constructing new buildings using carbon intensive materials, such
as steeland concrete. The Group emits greenhouse gases directly from energy used in its
construction operations.
As part of the Group’s Our Vision, the Group has set targets of reducing greenhouse gas
emissionsand becoming a net zero business by 2045. Whilst the Group has set targets to be
carbon neutral by 2045, the full impact on its cost base and on cash flows are inherently uncertain
and the Group’s assessment continues to evolve. Further information is provided in the Strategic
Report on pages 50 and 51 and the Group’s climate-related disclosures on pages 60 to 76 of the
annualreport.
Climate change initiatives and commitments could impact the Group’s future cash flows,
particularly the forecasts of future build costs: for example, in relation to materials, new building
technologies, regulatory changes, and changes in specifications. The potential effect of climate on
build costs in the future is not separately identifiable and the full extent is uncertain. Our work on
the forecasts of future build costs as they apply to the estimates of the cost of sales recognition is
discussed in our cost of sales recognition key audit matter.
As part of our audit, we have performed a risk assessment, including enquiries of Group and
divisional management to understand how the impact of commitments made by the Group in
respect of climate change, as well as the physical or transition risks of climate change, may affect
the financial statements and our audit.
Our risk assessment procedures also included comparing operational plans for the Group’s existing
climate related initiatives, such as the installation of air source heat pumps and EV charging points
on sites, to the Group’s forecast of future build costs.
We have also read the Group’s disclosure of climate related information in the annual report and
considered consistency with the financial statements and our audit knowledge.
168 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
3. Going concern, viability and principal risks and uncertainties
The directors have prepared the financial statements on the going concern basis as they do not intend to
liquidate the Group or the Parent Company or to cease their operations, and as they have concluded that the
Group’s and the Parent Company’s financial position means that this is realistic. They have also concluded that
there are no material uncertainties that could have cast significant doubt over their ability to continue as a going
concern for at least a year from the date of approval of the financial statements (“the going concern period”).
Going concern
We used our knowledge of the Group, its industry, and the general
economic environment to identify the inherent risks to its business
model and analysed how those risks might affect the Group’s and Parent
Company’s financial resources or ability to continue operations over the
going concern period.
The risk that we considered most likely to adversely affect the Group’s
and Parent Company’s available financial resources over this period was a
possible reduction in sales prices and volumes as a consequence of changes
in the economic environment leading to a sustained medium-term decline in
revenue and profits.
We also considered less predictable but realistic second order impacts,
such as cost inflation, delays to construction programmes and new building
regulations.
We considered whether these risks could plausibly affect the liquidity or
covenant compliance in the going concern period by comparing severe, but
plausible, downside scenarios that could arise from these risks individually
and collectively against the level of available financial resources and
covenants indicated by the Group’s financial forecasts.
We considered whether the going concern disclosure in note 1.2 and C1.2
to the financial statements gives a full and accurate description of the
directors’ assessment of going concern.
However, as we cannot predict all future events or conditions and as
subsequent events may result in outcomes that are inconsistent with
judgements that were reasonable at the time they were made, the above
conclusions are not a guarantee that the Group or the Parent Company
will continue in operation.
Our conclusions
• We consider that the directors’
use of the going concern basis of
accounting in the preparation of the
financial statements is appropriate;
• We have not identified, and concur
with the directors’ assessment that
there is not, a material uncertainty
related to events or conditions that,
individually or collectively, may cast
significant doubt on the Group’s or
Parent Company’s ability to continue
as a going concern for the going
concern period;
• We have nothing material to add
or draw attention to in relation
to the directors’ statement in
note 1.2 and C1.2 to the financial
statements on the use of the going
concern basis of accounting with no
material uncertainties that may cast
significant doubt over the Group and
Parent Company’s use of that basis
for the going concern period, and we
found the going concern disclosure
in note 1.2 and C1.2 to be acceptable;
and
• The related statement under the
UK Listing Rules set out on page
160 is materially consistent with the
financial statements and our audit
knowledge.
KPMG LLP’s Independent Auditor’s Report continued
To the members of The Berkeley Group Holdings plc
169 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Disclosures of emerging and principal risks and longer-term viability
Our responsibility
We are required to perform procedures to identify whether there is a
material inconsistency between the directors’ disclosures in respect of
emerging and principal risks and the viability statement, and the financial
statements and our audit knowledge.
Based on those procedures, we have nothing material to add or draw
attention to in relation to:
• the directors’ confirmation within the Viability Statement on page 83 that
they have carried out a robust assessment of the emerging and principal
risks facing the Group, including those that would threaten its business
model, future performance, solvency and liquidity;
• the ‘how we manage risks’ disclosures describing these risks and how
emerging risks are identified and explaining how they are being managed
and mitigated; and
• the directors’ explanation in the Viability Statement of how they have
assessed the prospects of the Group, over what period they have
done so and why they considered that period to be appropriate, and
their statement as to whether they have a reasonable expectation that
the Group will be able to continue in operation and meet its liabilities
as they fall due over the period of their assessment, including any
related disclosures drawing attention to any necessary qualifications or
assumptions.
We are also required to review the Viability Statement set out on page 83
under the UK Listing Rules.
Our work is limited to assessing these matters in the context of only the
knowledge acquired during our financial statements audit. As we cannot
predict all future events or conditions and as subsequent events may result
in outcomes that are inconsistent with judgements that were reasonable
at the time they were made, the absence of anything to report on these
statements is not a guarantee as to the Group’s and Parent Company’s
longer-term viability.
Our reporting
We have nothing material to add or
draw attention to in relation to these
disclosures.
We have concluded that these
disclosures are materially consistent
with the financial statements and our
audit knowledge.
4. Key audit matters
What we mean
Key audit matters are those matters that, in our professional judgement, were of most significance in the audit of the
financial statements and include the most significant assessed risks of material misstatement (whether or not due to
fraud) identified by us, including those which had the greatest effect on:
• the overall audit strategy;
• the allocation of resources in the audit; and
• directing the efforts of the engagement team.
We include below the Key Audit Matters in decreasing order of audit significance together with our key audit
procedures to address those matters and our results from those procedures. These matters were addressed, and
our results are based on procedures undertaken, for the purpose of our audit of the financial statements as a whole.
We do not provide a separate opinion on these matters.
170 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
4.1 Cost of sales recognition (group)
Financial Statement Elements
FY26 FY25
Cost of sales £1,786.1m £1,826.2m
Our assessment of risk vs FY25
We have not identified any significant changes
in our assessment of the level of risk relating
to the cost of sales recognition compared to
FY25. However, we have additionally included
the risk of fraud in FY26.
Our results
FY26: Acceptable
FY25: Acceptable
Description of the Key Audit Matter Our response to the risk
Cost of sales is subject to estimation
uncertainty as it is dependent on
the Group’s estimate of future sales
prices and land and build costs,
including an allowance for risk.
Further, estimation uncertainty and
exposure to market cyclicality exists
within longer term sites. Forecasts
are dependent on market conditions,
which can be difficult to predict
and can be influenced by political
and economic factors including, but
not limited to, the future market
uncertainties surrounding the longer
term impacts of macroeconomic
factors, uncertainties over associated
costs and sales prices.
The effect of this matter is that,
as part of our risk assessment,
we determined that cost of sales
has a high degree of estimation
uncertainty, with a potential range
of reasonable outcomes greater
than our materiality for the financial
statements as a whole. The financial
statements (note 2.13) disclose that
this is unlikely to have a material
effect in the next financial year.
As the Group has now implemented
an annual bonus scheme, which
incentivises senior management
to achieve in year financial targets,
we have identified a fraud risk (in
addition to the risk of error identified
in prior years).
Our procedures to address the risk included:
Methodology choice: We assessed whether the cost allocation methodology used
by the Group to recognise cost of sales, including any changes in methodology
made in the year, was in accordance with the Group’s accounting policies;
Control observation and operation: We attended a haphazard sample of the
Group’s build cost meetings that are held for each site to assess the discussion and
review of site forecasts. We assessed whether the appropriate individuals attended
the meetings, and whether the site forecast costs for developments were
challenged and discussed, and costs forecasts were updated as appropriate; and
We tested the effectiveness of control over changes in margin for a random
sample of sites where cost of sales was recognised in the year.
Site visits: We attended a sample of site visits, where we inspected the
physical progress of the project and held inquires with the site personnel,
outside of the financial reporting team regarding the forecast cost, revenue
and contingency assumptions.
For a sample of sites that we considered to be at higher risk of misstatement,
due to either their size, complexity or specific risk factors, we inspected the
whole site forecasts and challenged the Group’s inputs and assumptions by
performing the following procedures:
Historical and current transactions comparison – forecast sales prices: We
compared forecast sales prices to recent prices achieved for similar units as
this is the best indicator of current market prices; compared forecast sales
prices to average sales prices per unit and square footage achieved to date on
a site; and assessed the Group’s historical accuracy of forecasting sales prices.
Historical and current transactions comparison – forecast costs: We assessed
the Group’s historical accuracy of forecasting costs by comparing build
costs incurred to date to original budgets and benchmarking forecast build
costs against similar sites across the Group. We benchmarked contingencies
included in the site wide forecasts for cost increases, sales price uncertainties
or other potential changes such as new regulations or climate related costs to
forecast contingencies held for similar sites across the Group and to historical
uncertainties that have crystalised;
Our sector experience: We challenged the Group’s forecast sales price
and forecast cost assumptions using our own expectations based on our
knowledge of the Group and experience of the industry in which it operates;
Sensitivity analysis: We used third party data for the housing market and
industry cost indices to sensitise the sales price and build cost assumptions,
to assess the impact on the forecast margin used to allocate costs and
compared the results to site contingencies held; and
Assessing transparency: We considered the adequacy of the Group’s
disclosures in note 2.13 to the financial statements regarding the degree of
judgement, estimation uncertainty and sensitivity to key assumptions involved
in arriving at the forecast site margins and resultant cost of sales recognised.
KPMG LLP’s Independent Auditor’s Report continued
To the members of The Berkeley Group Holdings plc
171 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Communications with The Berkeley Group Holdings plc’s Audit Committee
Our discussions with and reporting to the Audit Committee included:
• Our approach to the audit of cost of sales including details of the assessed risk of fraud, our planned substantive
procedures and the extent of our control reliance.
• Our assessment of the Group’s methodology for accounting for cost of sales.
• Our assessment of the key assumptions used by management in determining the cost of sales to be recognised for
units legally completed in the year.
• Our assessment of the level of contingency held across the Group’s sites.
• The adequacy of disclosures made by the Group on the estimates, and related estimation uncertainty, used to
determine the amount of cost of sales to be recognised.
Areas of particular auditor judgement
We identified the forecast sales, based on the estimate of future sales prices, and build costs, including an allowance
for risk, utilised in the Group’s cost of sales estimate as the area of particular audit judgement.
Our results
We found the cost of sales recognised to be acceptable (FY25 result: acceptable).
Further information in the Annual Report and Accounts: See the Audit Committee Report on pages 124 to 125 for
details on how the Audit Committee considered cost of sales recognition as an area of significant attention, note 2.13
for the accounting policy on cost of sales recognition, and note 2.13 for the financial disclosures.
172 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
4.2 Post Completion Development Provision (Group)
Financial Statement Elements
FY26 FY25
Post
completion
development
provision
£214.4m £217.5m
Our assessment of risk vs FY25
We have not identified any significant
changes in our assessment of the level of
risk relating to the post completion
development provision compared to
FY25. However, we have additionally
included the risk of fraud in FY26.
Our results
FY26: Acceptable
FY25: Acceptable
Description of the Key Audit Matter Our response to the risk
Subjective estimate
The Group holds post completion
development provisions in respect
of claims and construction related
liabilities that have arisen, or that
prior claims experience indicates
may arise subsequent to the
completion of certain developments.
The identification and estimation of
amounts to be recognised in relation
to post completion development
provisions is judgemental by its nature
as it requires the Group to make a
number of estimates, including the
forecast costs to rectify identified
issues and whether prior claims
experience is reflective of future
issues. The effect of these matters is
that, as part of our risk assessment,
we determined that post completion
development provisions have a high
degree of estimation uncertainty,
with a potential range of reasonable
outcomes greater than our materiality
for the financial statements as a whole.
The financial statements (note 2.17)
disclose that this is unlikely to have a
material effect in the next financial year.
As the Group has now implemented an
annual bonus scheme, which incentivises
senior management to achieve in year
financial targets, we have identified a
fraud risk (in addition to the risk of error
identified in prior years).
We performed the tests below rather than seeking to rely on any of the
Group’s controls because the nature of the balance is such that we would
expect to obtain audit evidence primarily through the detailed procedures
described.
Our procedures to address the risk included:
Methodology: We assessed the Group’s methodology for accounting for
provisions and the appropriateness of estimates made in making provisions;
Personnel interviews: We inspected board minutes to identify potential
claims to be provided for and corroborated through enquiries of Group
Directors and Management, and divisional management and compared to
Group’s provisions assessments;
Test of detail: We critically assessed the Group’s calculation of the provision
held, challenged internal remediation cost assessments and considered third
party evidence for provisions made for significant known issues and claims;
Historical comparisons: Where past events indicated that an obligation may
arise, we evaluated the Group’s risk assessment performed in respect of
known and/or settled issues and considered any changes in the development
portfolio over time, in assessing the estimation of the provision. For a sample
of post completion development provisions, we performed a retrospective
review, comparing actual rectification costs incurred to the Group’s previously
estimated cost to evaluate the Group’s forecasting accuracy;
Our sector experience: We utilised our own experience to challenge the
assumptions over appropriateness of the rectification cost assumptions;
Enquiry of lawyers: In respect of open matters of litigation, we held
enquiries with the Group’s in-house legal counsel and inspected relevant
correspondence and considered against provisions made; and
Assessing transparency: We considered the adequacy of the Group’s
disclosures in the financial statements regarding the degree of judgement,
estimation uncertainty, and sensitivity to key assumptions involved in
arriving at the recorded post completion development provisions.
Communications with The Berkeley Group Holdings plc’s Audit Committee
Our discussions with and reporting to the Audit Committee included:
• Our approach to the audit of the post completion development provisions including details of the assessed risk of
fraud, and details of our planned substantive procedures.
• Our assessment of the Group’s methodology for accounting for provisions.
• Our conclusion of the appropriateness of estimates made in making provisions.
• The adequacy of disclosures made by the Group on the estimates, and related estimation uncertainty, used to
determine the amount of provisions to be recognised.
Areas of particular auditor judgement
We identified the Group’s estimation of amounts to be recognised as a provision to be the area of particular auditor
judgement.
Our results
We found the amount of post completion development provision to be acceptable (FY25 result: acceptable).
Further information in the Annual Report and Accounts: See the Audit Committee Report on pages 124 to 125 for details
on how the Audit Committee considered post completion development provisions as an area of significant attention, note
2.17 for the accounting policy on post completion development provisions and note 2.17 for the financial disclosures.
KPMG LLP’s Independent Auditor’s Report continued
To the members of The Berkeley Group Holdings plc
173 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
4.3 Recoverability of the Parent Company’s Investment in Subsidiaries
Financial Statement Elements
FY26 FY25
Investment
carrying
value note
C2.4
£1,446.9m £1,445.8m
Our assessment of risk vs FY25
We have not identified any significant
changes in our assessment of the level of
risk relating to the recoverability of the
Parent Company investment in
subsidiaries in comparison to FY25.
Our results
FY26: Acceptable
FY25: Acceptable
Description of the Key Audit Matter Our response to the risk
The carrying amount of the Parent
Company’s investment in subsidiary
undertakings represents circa
68.1% (FY25: 69.3%) of the Parent
Company’s total assets.
Their recoverability is not at high risk
of significant misstatement or subject
to significant judgement. However,
due to their materiality in the context
of the Parent Company financial
statements, this is considered to be
the area that has the greatest effect
on our overall Parent Company audit.
The parent Company holds a direct
investment in The Berkeley Group
plc, which in turn holds the rest of the
Group’s subsidiaries.
Our procedures to address the risk included:
Test of detail: We compared the carrying amount of the investment with
the material indirect subsidiaries’ net assets in the Group’s consolidation to
identify whether their aggregate net assets, being an approximation of the
investment’s minimum recoverable amount, were in excess of the carrying
amount of that investment and assessing whether those indirect subsidiaries
have historically been profit-making; and
Assessing subsidiary audits: We assessed the work performed by the
subsidiary audit team on all of those subsidiaries and considered the results
of that work on those subsidiaries’ profits and net assets.
Assessing subsidiary audits: We performed the tests above rather than
seeking to rely on any of the Group’s controls because the nature of the
balance is such that we would expect to obtain audit evidence primarily
through the detailed procedures described.
We performed the tests above rather than seeking to rely on any of the Group’s
controls because the nature of the balance is such that we would expect to
obtain audit evidence primarily through the detailed procedures described.
Communications with The Berkeley Group Holdings plc’s Audit Committee
Our discussions with and reporting to the Audit Committee included::
• Our approach to the audit of the recoverability of the Parent Company investment in subsidiaries including details
of our planned substantive procedures.
• Our conclusion of the appropriateness of the carrying value of the Parent Company’s investment in subsidiaries.
We found the Parent Company’s conclusion that there is no impairment of its investment in subsidiaries to be
acceptable (FY25 result: acceptable).
Further information in the Annual Report and Accounts: See notes C2.4 for the accounting policy on the Parent
Company’s investment in subsidiary and note C2.4 for the financial disclosures.
174 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
5. Our Ability to Detect Irregularities, and our Response
Fraud – Identifying and responding to risks of material misstatement due to fraud
Fraud risk assessment To identify risks of material misstatement due to fraud (‘fraud risks’) we
assessed events or conditions that could indicate an incentive or pressure
to commit fraud or provide an opportunity to commit fraud.
Our risk assessment procedures included:
• our forensic specialists assisted us in identifying key fraud risks. This
included holding a discussion with the engagement partner and
engagement manager to assist with designing relevant audit procedures
to respond to the risk of management override of controls;
• enquiring of Directors, the Audit Committee, internal audit, internal legal
counsel and inspection of policy documentation as to the Group’s high-level
policies and procedures to prevent and detect fraud, including the internal
audit function, and the Group’s channel for ‘whistleblowing’, as well as
whether they have knowledge of any actual, suspected or alleged fraud;
• reading Board, Audit Committee and Remuneration Committee minutes;
• considering remuneration incentive schemes (these include the 2011
LTIP, Restricted Share Plan and Long-Term Option Plan), Annual Bonus
scheme linked to FY26 financial performance, and performance targets
for management and Directors, including any revenue and trading margin
targets for management remuneration; and
• using analytical procedures to identify any unusual or unexpected
relationships.
Risk communications We communicated identified fraud risks throughout the audit team and
remained alert to any indications of fraud throughout the audit.
Fraud risks As required by auditing standards and taking into account our overall
knowledge of the control environment, we perform procedures to
address the risk of management override of controls, in particular the risk
that Group and component management may be in a position to make
inappropriate accounting entries and the risk of bias in accounting estimates
and judgments such as cost of sales recognition and post completion
development provisions. On this audit we do not believe there is a fraud risk
related to revenue recognition as the accounting for the Group’s revenue is
non-complex and the majority is only recognised on the legal completion
of the sale, being the point at which the balance of the sale is paid for and
title of the unit transfers to the customer. There are therefore limited levels
of judgment with limited opportunities for manual intervention in the sales
process to fraudulently manipulate revenue. We identified a fraud risk in
relation to the Group’s cost of sales and post completion development
provisions estimates due to possible pressures on the Group following the
introduction of a new Annual Bonus scheme which is linked to FY26 financial
performance measures. We did not identify any additional fraud risks.
Link to KAMS A fraud risk arising from the Annual Bonus scheme has resulted in a risk
of fraud in KAMs 4.1. Cost of Sales Recognition and 4.2 Post Completion
Development provisions.
Procedures to address fraud risks In determining the audit procedures, we took into account the results of
our evaluation and testing of the operating effectiveness of some of the
Group-wide fraud risk management controls, such as the appropriate sign
off of changes in forecasted site wide margin and appropriate challenge
to changes in forecasted costs within the Build Cost meetings. We also
performed procedures including:
• identifying journal entries and other adjustments to test for all entities
across the Group based on specific risk-based criteria and comparing
the identified entries to supporting documentation. These included those
posted by senior finance management, certain descriptions, those posted
to unusual accounts, seldom used accounts and journals posted by leavers;
• holding inquires with the site personnel, outside of the financial reporting
team regarding the forecast cost, revenue and contingency assumptions for
Cost of Sales and hold enquiries of Group Directors and Management, and
divisional management and compare to Group’s provisions assessments; and
• assessing whether the judgements made in making accounting estimates
are indicative of a potential bias.
KPMG LLP’s Independent Auditor’s Report continued
To the members of The Berkeley Group Holdings plc
175 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Laws and regulations – Identifying and responding to risks of material misstatement relating to compliance with
laws and regulations
Laws and regulations risk assessment We identified areas of laws and regulations that could reasonably be
expected to have a material effect on the financial statements from our
general commercial and sector experience, through discussion with the
Directors and other management (as required by auditing standards),
and from inspection of the Group’s regulatory and legal correspondence
and discussed with the Directors and other management the policies and
procedures regarding compliance with laws and regulations.
As The Group is subject to a number of regulations, including financial
reporting regulations, health and safety regulations, and building safety
regulations. Our assessment of risks involved gaining an understanding of
the control environment including the entity’s procedures for complying
with regulatory requirements.
Risk communications We communicated identified laws and regulations throughout the audit
team and remained alert to any indications of non-compliance throughout
the audit.
Direct laws context and link to audit The potential effect of these laws and regulations on the financial
statements varies considerably. The Group is subject to laws and regulations
that directly affect the financial statements including financial reporting
legislation (including related legislation), distributable profits legislation
and taxation legislation and we assessed the extent of compliance with
these laws and regulations as part of our procedures on the related financial
statement items.
Most significant indirect law/
regulation areas
The Group is subject to many other laws and regulations where the
consequences of non-compliance could have a material effect on amounts or
disclosures in the financial statements, for instance through the imposition
of fines or litigation or the loss of the Group’s license to operate.
We identified the following areas as those most likely to have such an effect:
• UK planning permission and building regulations, such as the Building
Safety Act;
• health and safety
• anti-bribery;
• anti-money laundering and sanctions checking;
• employment laws;
• data protection laws;
• environmental laws; and
• Competition Law.
Auditing standards limit the required audit procedures to identify non-
compliance with these laws and regulations to enquiry of the directors and
other management and inspection of regulatory and legal correspondence, if
any. Therefore, if a breach of operational regulations is not disclosed to us or
evident from relevant correspondence, an audit will not detect that breach.
Context
Context of the ability of the audit to
detect fraud or breaches of law or
regulation
Owing to the inherent limitations of an audit, there is an unavoidable risk
that we may not have detected some material misstatements in the financial
statements, even though we have properly planned and performed our
audit in accordance with auditing standards. For example, the further
removed non-compliance with laws and regulations is from the events
and transactions reflected in the financial statements, the less likely the
inherently limited procedures required by auditing standards would
identify it. In addition, as with any audit, there remained a higher risk of
non-detection of fraud, as fraud may involve collusion, forgery, intentional
omissions, misrepresentations, or the override of internal controls. Our
audit procedures are designed to detect material misstatement. We are
not responsible for preventing non-compliance or fraud and cannot be
expected to detect non-compliance with all laws and regulations.
176 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
6. Our determination of materiality
The scope of our audit was influenced by our application of materiality. We set quantitative thresholds and
overlay qualitative considerations to help us determine the scope of our audit and the nature, timing and extent
of our procedures, and in evaluating the effect of misstatements, both individually and in the aggregate, on the
financial statements as a whole.
£21.4m
(FY25: £25m)
Materiality for the
group financial
statements as a whole
What we mean
A quantitative reference for the purpose of planning and performing our audit.
Basis for determining performance materiality and judgements applied
Materiality for the Group financial statements as a whole was set at £21.4m (FY25: £25.0m).
This was determined with reference to a benchmark of Group profit before taxation.
Consistent with FY25, we determined that Group profit before taxation remains the main
benchmark for the Group as the users of the financial statements will be primarily interested
in the profitability of the Group and its ability to generate returns for shareholders.
Our Group materiality of £21.4m was determined by applying a percentage to the Group
profit before taxation. When using a benchmark of Group profit before taxation to
determine overall materiality, KPMG’s approach for listed entities considers a guideline
range of 3%-5% of the measure. In setting overall Group materiality, we applied a
percentage of 4.7% (FY25: 4.7%) to the benchmark.
Materiality for the Parent Company financial statements as a whole was set at £14.5m
(FY25: £14.5m), determined with reference to a benchmark of Parent Company total
assets, of which it represents 0.7% (FY25: 0.7%).
£16M
(FY25: £18.7M)
Performance
Materiality
What we mean
Our procedures on individual account balances and disclosures were performed to a lower
threshold, performance materiality, so as to reduce to an acceptable level the risk that
individually immaterial misstatements in individual account balances add up to a material
amount across the financial statements as a whole.
Basis for determining performance materiality and judgements applied
We have considered performance materiality at a level of 75% (FY25: 75%) of materiality
for The Berkeley Group Holdings plc Group financial statements as a whole to be appropriate.
The Parent Company performance materiality was set at £10.8m (FY25: £10.8m), which equates
to 75% (FY25: 75%) of materiality for the Parent Company financial statements as a whole.
We applied this percentage in our determination of performance materiality because we
did not identify any factors indicating an elevated level of risk.
£1M
(FY25: £1.25M)
Audit misstatement
posting threshold
What we mean
This is the amount below which identified misstatements are considered to be clearly
trivial from a quantitative point of view. We may become aware of misstatements below
this threshold which could alter the nature, timing and scope of our audit procedures, for
example if we identify smaller misstatements which are indicators of fraud.
This is also the amount above which all misstatements identified are communicated to the
Company’s Audit Committee.
Basis for determining performance materiality and judgements applied
We set our audit misstatement posting threshold at 5% (FY25: 5%) of our materiality for
the Group financial statements. We also report to the Audit Committee any other identified
misstatements that warrant reporting on qualitative grounds.
The overall materiality for the Group financial statements of £21.4m (FY25: £25.0m) compares as follows to the
main financial statement caption amounts:
Total Group Revenue Group profit before tax Total Group Assets
FY26 FY25 FY26 FY25 FY26 FY25
Financial
statement Caption
£2,383.3m £2,486.5m £451.4m £528.9m £6,482.9m £6,692.8m
Group Materiality
as % of caption
0.9% 1.0% 4.7% 4.7% 0.3% 0.4%
KPMG LLP’s Independent Auditor’s Report continued
To the members of The Berkeley Group Holdings plc
177 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
7. The scope of our audit
Group
scope
What we mean
How the Group auditor determined the procedures to be performed across the Group.
We performed risk assessment procedures to determine which of the Group’s components are likely
to include risks of material misstatement to the Group financial statements and which procedures to
perform at these components to address those risks.
In total, we identified 16 (FY25: 16) components, having considered our evaluation of the Group’s
operational structure, the existence of common risk profiles across business activities, the presence of
key audit matters and our ability to perform audit procedures centrally.
Of those, we identified 5 (FY25: 5) quantitatively significant components which contained the largest
percentages of either total revenue or total assets of the Group, for which we performed audit procedures.
We also identified 1 (FY25:3) components as requiring special audit consideration, owing to Group
risks relating to cost of sales recognition and post completion development provisions residing in
these components.
Additionally, having considered qualitative and quantitative factors, we selected 1 (FY25: 1) component
with significant borrowings contributing to the specific RMMs of the Group financial statements.
The below summarises where we performed audit procedures:
Component type
Number of components
where we performed audit
procedures
Range of
materiality
applied
Quantitatively significant components 5 (FY25:5) £11.0m–£12.5m
(FY25: £10.5m–14.5m)
Components requiring special audit consideration 1 (FY25:3) £21.4m
(FY25: £6m–8m)
Other components where we performed procedures 1 (FY25:1) £9m
(FY25; £9m)
Total 7 (FY25:9)
All the work on components and the audit of the Parent Company were performed by the Group auditor.
Our audit procedures covered 100% (FY25: 100%) of Group revenue. We performed audit procedures
in relation to components that accounted for 86% (FY25: 93%) of Group profit before taxation and
98% (FY25: 98%) of Group total assets.
For the remaining components for which we performed no audit procedures, no component
represented more than 1.7% (FY25: 3%) of Group profit before taxation or 0.2% (FY25: 1%) of Group
total assets. We performed analysis at an aggregated Group level to re-examine our assessment that
there is not a reasonable possibility of a material misstatement in these components.
Impact of controls on our group audit
We identified the main finance IT system used to record underlying transactions within the Group to
be the main IT system relevant to our Group audit.
We used IT auditors to assist us in assessing the design and operating effectiveness of the general IT
controls of this system, which is managed from the UK.
Following our testing over the IT system, we relied on general IT controls to allow us to place reliance
on these controls when designing our audit response. This reduced both the extent of testing required
over the completeness and accuracy of system information used in manual controls and sample sizes
in our substantive procedures for quantitatively significant components.
We also tested the design and operating effectiveness of manual controls over the Cost of Sales
recognition key audit matter and certain other areas of the audit, including revenue and inventory.
For these areas we were able to rely on these manual controls, which reduced both the extent of
substantive testing required over the completeness and accuracy of system information used in
manual controls and sample sizes in our substantive procedures.
In the other areas of the audit a predominately substantive approach was taken.
178 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
8. Other information in the annual report
The directors are responsible for the other information presented in the Annual Report together with the
financial statements. Our opinion on the financial statements does not cover the other information and,
accordingly, we do not express an audit opinion or, except as explicitly stated below, any form of assurance
conclusion thereon.
All other information
Our responsibility
Our responsibility is to read the other information and, in doing so, consider
whether, based on our financial statements audit work, the information therein
is materially misstated or inconsistent with the financial statements or our audit
knowledge.
Our reporting
Based solely on that work we
have not identified material
misstatements or inconsistencies
in the other information.
Strategic Report and Directors’ Report
Our responsibility and reporting
Based solely on our work on the other information described above we report to you as follows:
• we have not identified material misstatements in the strategic report and the directors’ report;
• in our opinion the information given in those reports for the financial year is consistent with the financial statements;
and
• in our opinion those reports have been prepared in accordance with the Companies Act 2006.
Directors’ Remuneration Report
Our responsibility
We are required to form an opinion as to whether the part of the Directors’
Remuneration Report to be audited has been properly prepared in accordance
with the Companies Act 2006.
Our reporting
In our opinion the part of the
Directors’ Remuneration Report
to be audited has been properly
prepared in accordance with the
Companies Act 2006.
Corporate Governance Disclosures
Our responsibility
We are required to perform procedures to identify whether there is a material
inconsistency between the financial statements and our audit knowledge, and:
• the directors’ statement that they consider that the annual report and financial
statements taken as a whole is fair, balanced and understandable, and provides
the information necessary for shareholders to assess the Group’s position and
performance, business model and strategy;
• the section of the annual report describing the work of the Audit Committee,
including the significant issues that the Audit Committee considered in relation
to the financial statements, and how these issues were addressed; and
• the section of the annual report that describes the review of the effectiveness
of the Group’s risk management and internal control systems.
Our reporting
Based on those procedures, we
have concluded that each of these
disclosures is materially consistent
with the financial statements and
our audit knowledge.
We are also required to review the part of the Corporate Governance Statement
relating to the Group’s compliance with the provisions of the UK Corporate
Governance Code specified by the UK Listing Rules for our review.
We have nothing to report in this
respect.
Other matters on which we are required to report by exception
Our responsibility
Under the Companies Act 2006, we are required to report to you if, in our opinion:
• adequate accounting records have not been kept by the Parent Company,
or returns adequate for our audit have not been received from branches not
visited by us; or
• the Parent Company financial statements and the part of the Directors’
Remuneration Report to be audited are not in agreement with the accounting
records and returns; or
• certain disclosures of directors’ remuneration specified by law are not made; or
• we have not received all the information and explanations we require for our audit.
Our reporting
We have nothing to report in
these respects.
KPMG LLP’s Independent Auditor’s Report continued
To the members of The Berkeley Group Holdings plc
179 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
9. Respective responsibilities
Directors’ responsibilities
As explained more fully in their statement set out on page 161, the directors are responsible for: the preparation
of the financial statements including being satisfied that they give a true and fair view; such internal control
as they determine is necessary to enable the preparation of financial statements that are free from material
misstatement, whether due to fraud or error; assessing the Group and Parent Company’s ability to continue as
a going concern, disclosing, as applicable, matters related to going concern; and using the going concern basis
of accounting unless they either intend to liquidate the Group or the Parent Company or to cease operations, or
have no realistic alternative but to do so.
Auditor’s responsibilities
Our objectives are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements as a whole are
free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error, and to issue our opinion in an auditor’s
report. Reasonable assurance is a high level of assurance, but does not guarantee that an audit conducted
in accordance with ISAs (UK) will always detect a material misstatement when it exists. Misstatements can
arise from fraud or error and are considered material if, individually or in aggregate, they could reasonably be
expected to influence the economic decisions of users taken on the basis of the financial statements.
A fuller description of our responsibilities is provided on the FRC’s website at www.frc.org.uk/auditorsresponsibilities.
The Company is required to include these financial statements in an annual financial report prepared under
Disclosure Guidance and Transparency Rule 4.1.17R and 4.1.18R. This auditor’s report provides no assurance
over whether the annual financial report has been prepared in accordance with those requirements.
10. The purpose of our audit work and to whom we owe our responsibilities
This report is made solely to the Company’s members, as a body, 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 Company’s members
those matters we are required to state to them in an auditor’s report and for no other purpose. To the fullest
extent permitted by law, we do not accept or assume responsibility to anyone other than the Company and the
Company’s members, as a body, for our audit work, for this report, or for the opinions we have formed.
Anna Jones (Senior Statutory Auditor)
for and on behalf of KPMG LLP, Statutory Auditor
Chartered Accountants
London
23 June 2026
180 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Consolidated Income Statement
Consolidated Statement of Comprehensive Income
2026 2025
Notes
£m£m
Profit after taxation for the year
318. 3
382.0
Other comprehensive income
Items that will not be reclassified to profit or loss:
Actuarial gain recognised in the pension scheme
2.5
0 .1
0.2
Total items that will not be reclassified to profit or loss
0.1
0. 2
Other comprehensive income for the year
0.1
0. 2
Total comprehensive income for the year
318.4
382 . 2
2026 2025
Notes
£m£m
Revenue
2.1
2 , 383. 3
2,4 86 . 5
Cost of sales
(1 , 7 8 6 .1)
(1,8 26 .2)
Gross profit
5 9 7. 2
6 60. 3
Net operating expenses
(150.4)
(16 0. 3)
Operating profit
446. 8
500.0
Finance income
2.3
4 0. 8
55. 8
Finance costs
2.3
(39. 2)
(4 1 . 6)
Share of results of joint ventures using the equity method
2.12
3.0
14.7
Profit before taxation for the year
451 .4
528 . 9
Income tax expense
2.6
(13 3 .1)
(1 4 6 . 9)
Profit after taxation for the year
318. 3
382.0
Earnings per share (pence):
Basic
2.7
331.6
371 . 8
Diluted
2.7
3 3 1 .1
370 . 0
181 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Consolidated Statement of Financial Position
2026 2025
As at 30 April
Notes
£m £m
Assets
Non-current assets
Intangible assets
2.8
1 7. 2
1 7. 2
Investment property
2.9
2 9 7. 2
1 45 .7
Property, plant and equipment
2.10
11. 6
2 7. 2
Right-of-use assets
2.11
3.8
4.2
Investments accounted for using the equity method
2.12
20 3 .1
24 3 . 4
Deferred tax assets
2.18
61.6
87. 3
594 . 5
52 5 .0
Current assets
Inventories
2.13
4 , 74 3 . 3
5 ,052 . 2
Trade and other receivables
2.14
11 9.9
88.8
Current tax receivables
1.9
11.6
Cash and cash equivalents
2.15
1 ,02 3 . 3
1 , 015 . 2
5,888.4
6 , 1 6 7. 8
Total assets
6,482 .9
6,692 . 8
Liabilities
Non-current liabilities
Borrowings
2.24
(6 6 0 . 0)
(6 7 7. 9)
Trade and other payables
2.16
(37 2 . 3)
(4 6 2 . 8)
Lease liabilities
2.11
(1 . 9)
(2 . 3)
Provisions for other liabilities and charges
2.17
(1 65 . 8)
(153 . 6)
(1 , 20 0.0)
(1 , 2 9 6 .6)
Current liabilities
Trade and other payables
2.16
(1 , 5 8 0.1)
(1 ,7 5 8 . 4)
Lease liabilities
2.11
(2 .1)
(2 . 0)
Provisions for other liabilities and charges
2.17
(6 0. 5)
(76 . 0)
(1 ,6 42 .7)
(1,836. 4)
Total liabilities
(2 , 8 42 . 7)
(3 , 1 3 3 . 0)
Total net assets
3,6 40. 2
3 , 559 . 8
Equity
Shareholders’ equity
Share capital
2.19
5.6
6.0
Share premium
2.19
49. 8
49. 8
Capital redemption reserve
2.20
25 .9
25 . 5
Other reserve
2.20
(96 1 . 3)
(9 6 1 . 3)
Retained earnings
2.20
4 , 52 0. 2
4 ,4 39. 8
Total equity
3,6 40. 2
3 , 559 . 8
The financial statements on pages 180 to 225 were approved by the Board of Directors on 23 June 2026 and
were signed on its behalf by:
N L Eady
Chief Financial Officer
182 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Consolidated Statement of Changes in Equity
Capital
Share redemption Other Retained
Share capital premium reserve reserve earnings Total equity
Notes£m£m£m£m£m£m
At 1 May 2025
6.0
49. 8
25. 5
(96 1 . 3)
4 ,439. 8
3, 559. 8
Profit after taxation for the year
–
–
–
–
318. 3
31 8. 3
Other comprehensive income
for the year
–
–
–
–
0 .1
0 .1
Purchase of own shares
2.19
(0 . 4)
–
0. 4
–
(2 3 3 . 0)
(2 33 . 0)
Transactions with shareholders:
Charge in respect of employee
share schemes
2.5
–
–
–
–
(4 . 2)
(4 . 2)
Deferred tax in respect of
employee share schemes
2.18
–
–
–
–
(0 . 8)
(0. 8)
At 30 April 2026
5.6
49. 8
25.9
(96 1 . 3)
4 , 52 0. 2
3, 640. 2
At 1 May 2024
6.2
49. 8
25. 3
(9 6 1 . 3)
4 ,4 40. 5
3, 5 60. 5
Profit after taxation for the year
–
–
–
–
382.0
382.0
Other comprehensive income
for the year
–
–
–
–
0. 2
0. 2
Purchase of own shares
2.19
(0. 2)
–
0. 2
–
(129 .7)
(12 9.7)
Transactions with shareholders:
Charge in respect of employee
share schemes
2.5
–
–
–
–
(2 . 6)
(2 . 6)
Deferred tax in respect of
employee share schemes
2.18
–
–
–
–
1.2
1.2
Dividends to equity holders of
the Company
2.21
–
–
–
–
(2 5 1 . 8)
(2 5 1 . 8)
At 30 April 2025
6.0
49. 8
25. 5
(9 6 1 . 3)
4 ,4 39. 8
3, 559. 8
183 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Consolidated Cash Flow Statement
2026 2025
Notes
£m£m
Cash flows from operating activities
Cash generated from operations
2.23
343. 3
285 . 8
Interest received
43.0
5 7. 4
Interest paid
(2 7. 5)
(2 9. 6)
Income tax paid
(98 . 5)
(120. 5)
Net cash flow from operating activities
260. 3
1 93 .1
Cash flows from investing activities
Additions to investment property
2.9
(69 . 2)
(2 . 0)
Purchase of property, plant and equipment
2.10
–
(1 . 0)
Proceeds on disposal of property, plant and equipment
26.9
0.1
Dividends from joint ventures
2.12
45 .1
–
Movement in loans with joint ventures
2.12
(1 . 8)
(1 .1)
Net cash flow from investing activities
1.0
(4 . 0)
Cash flows from financing activities
Lease capital repayments
2.11
(2 . 3)
(2 . 3)
Purchase of own shares
2.19
(2 3 3 .0)
(12 9 .7)
Dividends to equity holders of the Company
2.21
–
(2 5 1 . 8)
Drawdown of borrowings
2.24
–
1 7. 9
Repayment of borrowings
2.24
(1 7. 9)
–
Net cash flow from financing activities
(253 . 2)
(3 6 5 . 9)
Net increase/(decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
2.23
8.1
(176 . 8)
Cash and cash equivalents at the start of the financial year
1 ,015 . 2
1 ,1 9 2 .0
Cash and cash equivalents at the end of the financial year
2.23
1 ,023 . 3
1 , 015 . 2
184 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
1 Basis of preparation
1.1 Introduction
These Consolidated Financial Statements have been prepared and approved by the Directors in accordance
with UK-adopted International Accounting Standards (UK-adopted IFRS). The Company has elected to prepare
its Parent Company financial statements in accordance with FRS 101; these are presented on pages 226 to 232.
The Group Financial Statements consolidate those of the Company and its subsidiaries (together referred to as
the Group) and equity account the Group’s interest in joint ventures. The Parent Company financial statements
present information about the Company as a separate entity and not about its Group.
The Consolidated Financial Statements have been prepared under the historical cost convention and on the
going concern basis. Historical cost is generally based on the fair value of the consideration given in exchange
for the assets. These Consolidated Financial Statements are presented in pounds sterling as the currency of the
primary economic environment in which the Group operates.
The Berkeley Group Holdings plc is a public company limited by shares, incorporated and domiciled in the
United Kingdom under the Companies Act and is registered in England and Wales. The Company’s registered
office and principal place of business is The Berkeley Group Holdings plc, Berkeley House, 19 Portsmouth Road,
Cobham, Surrey, KT11 1JG . The nature of the Group’s operations and its principal activities are set out in the
Strategic Report on pages 1, 16 and 17.
Critical accounting judgements and key sources of estimation uncertainty
The preparation of financial statements in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards
(IFRS) requires the use of certain critical accounting estimates. It may also require management to exercise
their judgement in the process of applying the Group’s accounting policies.
The key areas involving estimation uncertainty, which are significant to the Consolidated Financial Statements, are:
— cost of sales recognition which is dependent on an estimate of future selling prices and costs. See Note 2.13;
and
— post completion development provisions which rely on management judgement in estimating the quantum
and timing of outflows of resources to settle any associated legal or constructive obligations. See Note 2.17.
Whilst these are key areas of estimation uncertainty, these are unlikely to have a material impact on the
carrying value of assets and liabilities in the next financial year.
There are no significant areas of judgement in applying the Group’s accounting policies exercised by
management during the current or prior year.
Group accounting policies
The significant Group accounting policies are included within the relevant notes to the Consolidated
Financial Statements on pages 184 to 225. The accounting policies set out have been applied consistently
to all periods presented in these Consolidated Financial Statements, except for depreciation on investment
property which applies to the current financial year.
1.2 Going concern
The Directors have assessed the business plan and funding requirements of the Group over the medium-
term and compared these with the level of committed debt facilities and existing cash resources. As at
30 April 2026, the Group had net cash of £363 million and total liquidity of £1,563 million when this net cash
is combined with banking facilities of £800 million (committed to February 2029) and £400 million of listed
bonds (which mature in August 2031). Furthermore, the Group has cash due on forward sales of £1,006 million,
a significant proportion of which covers delivery for the next 18 months.
After the year end, the Group extended the banking facility to £1.0 billion, comprising a £240 million Term Loan,
which is fully drawn bearing interest at a rate linked to SONIA, and a £760 million Revolving Credit Facility
(RCF) which remains undrawn. These banking facilities are in place to June 2031 with two one-year extensions
taking the facility to June 2033. See Note 2.27 on page 218.
185 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
In making this assessment, consideration has been given to the uncertainty inherent in future financial forecasts
and where applicable, severe but plausible sensitivities have been applied to the key factors affecting the
financial performance of the Group. The Directors have a reasonable expectation that the Group has adequate
resources to continue in operational existence for not less than 12 months from the date of approval of these
Consolidated Financial Statements. For this reason, the Directors continue to adopt the going concern basis of
accounting in preparing the Consolidated Financial Statements.
1.3 Consideration of climate change
In preparing the Financial Statements, consideration has been given to the Group’s activities to address climate
change as part of Our Vision and its assessment and reporting of future climate-related transitional and
physical risks under the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (‘TCFD’) framework, both of which
are set out in the Strategic Report.
The costs incurred in developing the Group’s sites are held in inventory as these are trading in nature and
are therefore taken through cost of sales to match the revenue generated by the sale of properties on each
development. The recognition of cost of sales, and therefore the carrying value of inventory, during a financial
year is made by reference to the latest assessment of each development’s forecast profit margin, which is a key
area of estimation uncertainty as set out in Note 2.13.
The cost of specific climate change related activities undertaken as part of the development of a site is
inherently difficult to disassociate from other input costs as these typically involve a myriad of inter-related
design and construction based solutions, for instance over the selection of key materials and technologies
adopted to reduce embodied carbon and minimise future energy use of the Group’s occupied homes. In turn,
these activities are regulated by prevailing planning and building regulations requirements.
The future cost estimates used to determine the cost of sales recognition during the financial year inherently
reflect the Group’s current development-specific climate-related actions through its cost plans. Consistent with
the inherently higher cost uncertainty of its longer-term developments from evolving regulatory and other
market-led changes, the Group may incur as yet unknown costs associated with its own future climate-related
actions as well as costs arising from the impact of climate change. As set out in Note 2.13, the Group’s cost
assessments and allocations evolve over the life of each development.
1.4 Basis of consolidation
(a) Subsidiaries
The Consolidated Financial Statements comprise the financial statements of the Parent Company and all its
subsidiary undertakings. The accounting date for subsidiary undertakings is 30 April, unless otherwise stated in
Note 2.28.
Subsidiaries are entities controlled by the Group. The Group controls an entity when it is exposed to, or has
rights to, variable returns from its involvement with the entity and has the ability to affect those returns through
its power over the entity. In assessing control, the Group takes into consideration substantive rights that are
currently exercisable. The acquisition date is the date on which control is transferred to the acquirer. The
financial statements of subsidiaries are included in the Consolidated Financial Statements from the date that
control commences until the date that control ceases. Losses applicable to the non-controlling interests in a
subsidiary are allocated to the non-controlling interests even if doing so causes the non-controlling interests to
have a deficit balance.
The purchase method of accounting is used to account for the acquisition of subsidiary undertakings by the Group.
Where necessary, adjustments are made to the financial statements of subsidiaries to bring the accounting
policies used in line with those used by the Group. All intra-Group transactions, balances, income and expenses
are eliminated on consolidation. Acquisition-related costs are expensed as incurred.
(b) Joint ventures
Joint ventures are accounted for using the equity method (equity accounted investees) and are initially
recognised at cost.
The Group’s investment includes goodwill identified on acquisition, net of any accumulated impairment losses.
The Consolidated Financial Statements include the Group’s share of the total comprehensive income and
equity movements of equity accounted investees, from the date that joint control commences until the date
that joint control ceases. When the Group’s share of losses exceeds its interest in an equity accounted investee,
the Group’s carrying amount is reduced to £nil and recognition of further losses is discontinued except to the
extent that the Group has incurred legal or constructive obligations or made payments on behalf of an investee.
186 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
1 Basis of preparation continued
1.5 Adoption of new and revised standards
The following amendment to standards and interpretations is applicable to the Group and is mandatory for the
first time for the financial year beginning 1 May 2025:
— Amendments to IAS 21 The Effects of Changes in Foreign Exchange Rates.
The Group did not have to change its accounting policies or make retrospective adjustments as a result of this
amendment.
1.6 Impact of standards and interpretations in issue but not yet effective
The International Accounting Standards Board (‘IASB’) has published the following amendments to IFRSs,
which are not yet effective, and have not been applied to these Consolidated Financial Statements. These
amendments are not expected to have a significant impact on the results of the Group:
— Annual improvements to IFRS Accounting Standards – Volume 11; and
— Amendments to the Classification and Measurement of Financial Instruments (Amendments to IFRS 9
Financial Instruments and IFRS 7 Financial Instruments: Disclosures).
The amendment to IFRS 18 which is not yet effective is currently being assessed by the Group in relation to its
impact on the revised presentation and disclosure requirements for financial statements.
2 Results for the year
2.1 Revenue
The Group’s revenue derives principally from the sale of residential homes and commercial properties across
mixed use developments in the United Kingdom.
Revenue represents the amounts receivable from the sale of properties, comprising private and affordable
residential homes and commercial properties, ground rent assets and other income directly associated with
residential property development.
For the significant majority of residential and commercial property sales, properties are treated as sold
and profits and revenues are recognised when all performance obligations under the contract have been
satisfied, following which control of the unit is passed to the customer. This is determined as the point of
legal completion.
Where revenue arises on contracts where the customer controls the property during construction and for
which the Group has a right to payment for work performed, the Group recognises revenue over time.
Revenue and costs are recognised with reference to the stage of completion of the contract, measured by
construction progress.
Ground rent and land assets are treated as sold when contracts are exchanged, all material conditions
precedent to the sale have been satisfied and control of the assets has passed to the customer.
An analysis of the Group’s continuing revenue is as follows:
2026 2025
£m £m
Residential revenue
2,265.2
2,432.2
Commercial revenue
110.4
14.8
Land sale
7.7
39.5
2,383.3
2,486.5
Included within revenue is £432.2 million (2025: £403.3 million) of customer deposits, received in prior years, for
units that legally completed in the year. Included within commercial revenue is £1.4 million (2025: £3.7 million) of
revenue recognised in relation to the stage of completion of the contract. Included within residential revenue is
£9.6 million (2025: £27.2 million) of revenue recognised in relation to the stage of completion of the contract.
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
187 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
2.2 Segmental disclosure
Operating segments are identified in a manner consistent with the internal reporting provided to the chief
operating decision maker. The Group determines its reportable segments having regard to permitted
aggregation criteria with the principal condition being that the operating segments should have similar
economic characteristics.
The Group is engaged in residential-led, mixed use property development, comprising for-sale private and
affordable residential revenue and commercial revenue, alongside a Build to Rent platform that is operated
and managed internally.
For the purposes of determining its operating segments, the chief operating decision maker has been identified
as the Executive Committee of the Board. This Committee approves investment decisions, allocates the Group’s
resources and reviews the internal reporting in order to assess performance.
The Group has determined that its operating segments are the management teams that report into the
Executive Committee of the Board, having regard to the types of services provided and the manner in which
returns are earned by the Group. Operating segments with similar economic characteristics have been
aggregated, having regard to the aggregation criteria in IFRS 8.
For the purpose of monitoring segment performance and allocating resources between segments, assets are
considered to be attributable to for-sale private, affordable and commercial revenue and the Group’s Build to
Rent platform.
In line with IFRS 8, an entity shall report separately information about an operating segment that meets
any of the quantitative thresholds. As at 30 April 2026 and 30 April 2025, the assets allocated to the Build
to Rent platform are not considered to meet any of the quantitative thresholds and are therefore not
considered reportable.
2.3 Net finance income
2026 2025
£m £m
Finance income
40.8
55.8
Finance costs
Interest payable on borrowings and non-utilisation fees
(27.1)
(29.0)
Amortisation of facility fees
(3.4)
(2.2)
Other finance costs
(8.7)
(10.4)
(39.2)
(41.6)
Net finance income
1.6
14.2
Finance income predominantly represents interest earned on cash deposits. Other finance costs represent
imputed interest on land purchased on deferred settlement terms and lease interest.
188 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
2 Results for the year continued
2.4 Profit before taxation
Expenditure recorded in inventory is expensed through cost of sales at the time of the related property
sale. The amount of cost related to each property includes its share of the overall site costs including, where
relevant, its share of forecast costs to complete. See inventories Note 2.13 for further disclosures on the key
estimates and judgements around cost recognition.
Net operating expenditure is recognised in respect of goods and services received when supplied in
accordance with contractual terms. Provision is made when an obligation exists for a future liability in
respect of a past event and where the amount of the obligation can be reliably estimated.
Government grants are recognised when there is reasonable assurance that the Group will comply with the
conditions attached to them and the grants will be received. Grants related to assets are deducted from
the carrying value of the asset, and are recognised in the Income Statement so as to match with the related
costs they are intended to compensate for.
Profit before taxation is stated after charging/(crediting) the following amounts:
2026 2025
£m £m
Staff costs (note 2.5)
268.8
263.8
Depreciation on property, plant and equipment (note 2.10)
1.2
1.6
Depreciation on right-of-use assets (note 2.11)
2.1
2.2
(Profit)/loss on sale of property, plant and equipment
(9.8)
0.1
Fees paid and payable to the Company’s auditor for the audit
of the Group and Parent Company
1.5
1.5
Fees paid and payable to the Company’s auditor for other services:
Audit of the Company’s subsidiaries and joint ventures
0.1
0.1
Audit related assurance services
0.1
0.1
Non-audit related assurance services
0.1
0.1
The value of inventories expensed and included in the cost of sales is £1,737.6 million (2025: £1,756.5 million).
Government grants of £40.7 million (2025: £38.9 million) were received in the year and the prior year relating
to the provision of highway and other site infrastructure, for which all performance conditions were satisfied.
This amount is netted against inventory and no amount has been recorded in the Income Statement during the
year (2025: £nil).
Fees incurred in the year to the Group’s current auditor for audit and non-audit related assurance services
relate to the interim review and assurance services related to carbon emissions and compliance with the Green
Finance Framework.
Profit before taxation in the 2025 financial year includes an accrual for the settlement of the CMA’s
investigation into possible anti-competitive sharing of information in the housebuilding industry.
2.5 Directors and employees
Profit before taxation is stated after charging the following amounts:
2026 2025
£m £m
Staff costs:
Wages and salaries
220.6
217.8
Social security costs
30.5
27.3
Share based payments – equity settled
2.2
4.8
Share based payments – cash settled
1.0
–
Pension costs
14.5
13.9
268.8
263.8
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
189 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
The average monthly number of persons employed by the Group during the year was 2,487 (2025: 2,532).
Key management compensation
Key management comprises the Executive Members of the Board, as they are considered to have the authority
and responsibility for planning, directing and controlling the activities of the Group. Details of Directors’
emoluments included in the Income Statement are as follows:
2026 2025
£m £m
Directors’ remuneration
2.3
1.0
Amount charged under long-term incentive schemes
1.7
2.1
4.0
3.1
The Directors’ Remuneration Report includes disclosure of the gains made by Directors on the exercise of share
options during the year, which were £9.7 million (2025: £10.2 million) in aggregate.
N L Eady was appointed to the Board on 29 September 2025 and remuneration amounts disclosed in the table,
in the current year, are from the date of appointment to the Board.
Equity settled share based payments
Where the Company operates equity settled share based compensation plans, the fair value of the
employee services received in exchange for the grant of the options is recognised as an expense. The total
amount to be expensed over the vesting period is determined by reference to the fair value of the options
granted, taking into account only service and non-market conditions.
At each Balance Sheet date, the Group revises its estimate of the number of options that are expected to
vest. It recognises the impact of the revision to original estimates, if any, in the Income Statement, with a
corresponding adjustment to equity.
The proceeds received net of any directly attributable transaction costs are credited to share capital
(nominal value) and share premium when the options are exercised.
The Group operates three (2025: three) equity settled share based payment schemes. The charge/(credit) to the
Income Statement in respect of share based payments in the year relating to grants of share options awarded are:
— 2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan (2011 LTIP) credit of £0.2 million (2025: £0.4 million)
— 2022 Long-Term Option Plan (2022 LTOP) charge of £3.0 million (2025: £3.2 million)
— Restrictive Share Plan (RSP) credit of £0.6 million (2025: charge of £2.0 million)
The charge to the Income Statement attributable to key management was £1.0 million (2025: £2.1 million).
The charge to the reserves during the year in respect of employee share schemes was £4.2 million (2025: £2.6
million), resulting from the non-cash IFRS 2 charge for the year.
There were nil exercisable share options at the end of the year (2025: nil). During the year:
— 413,528 options vested under the 2011 LTIP, completing the scheme (2025: 377,612) and 1,637,850 banked
options lapsed (2025: nil)
— Nil options vested under the 2022 LTOP (2025: nil) and 135,000 options lapsed (2025: 200,000)
— Nil options vested under the RSP (2025: nil) and no options lapsed (2025: nil)
190 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
2 Results for the year continued
2.5 Directors and employees continued
2011 Long-Term Incentive Plan
The 2011 LTIP was approved by shareholders at the 2011 AGM. The 2011 LTIP is designed to incentivise
management to both deliver long-term shareholder returns and create value in the ongoing business. Under the
plan eligible employees are granted options which will only vest if certain performance conditions are satisfied.
The plan ran for 14 years, with the final options vested in September 2025, marking the vesting of the tenth and
final tranche of the 2011 LTIP. The original scheme was due to run until September 2021, but at the 2019 AGM
the scheme was extended, for eligible employees, by four years to September 2025.
The amount of options that vest is dependent on a shareholder return hurdle and, for certain employees, the
remuneration caps in place. Each year options can vest up to the value of their remuneration cap. Any options
prevented from vesting due to the caps are banked, and vest in equal tranches from September 2022 to 2025.
Additional returns equivalent to £2 per annum (approximately £283 million) must be returned to shareholders
from 2022 to 2025 in order for the banked options to vest.
Options granted under the plan are for nil consideration and carry no dividend or voting rights. The original
option price was £16.34, which equated to £2.3 billion of shareholder return that needed to be returned to
shareholders over the original term of the LTIP to 2021. The option price for each tranche was reduced by the
value of dividend paid each year, but fixed at 30 September 2021 for subsequent tranches vesting in 2022 to
2025. The fixed option price for tranches vesting from September 2022 to 2025 is £5.30.
Sale restrictions are in place which provide a maximum of 10% of the cumulative balance of the shares earned
to be sold each year.
The table below summarises the movement in options under the 2011 LTIP during the year:
2026
2025
Option price Number of Option price Number of
per share options per share options
£ No. £ No.
As at 1 May
–
2,051,378
–
2,428,990
Exercised during the year
5.30
(413,528)
5.30
(377,612)
Lapsed during the year
–
( 1,637,850)
–
–
As at 30 April
–
–
–
2,051,378
Fair value of 2011 LTIP options
The assessed fair value of the original options granted, determined using the current market pricing model, was
£3.17. The inputs into the current market pricing model were as follows:
Inputs
Grant date
5 September 2011
Final vesting date
30 September 2021
Share price at date of grant (p)
1,236
Exercise price
£nil
Discount rate (Group’s cost of capital over original vesting period at the grant date)
6.3%
Modifications to the 2011 LTIP, approved at the 2019 AGM, were considered to be non-beneficial due to the
extended service period and requirement for additional shareholder returns. Therefore, there was no impact on
the fair value of the options or accounting treatment applied.
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
191 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
2022 Long-Term Option Plan (LTOP)
The LTOP was approved by shareholders at the 2022 AGM. The LTOP is designed to ensure the remuneration
policy is as closely aligned to the Company’s strategy as possible and rewards management for enhancing value for
shareholders over the long term. Under the plan, eligible employees are awarded a one-off grant of options with an
initial exercise price of £48.50. Participation in the plan is at the discretion of the Remuneration Committee.
Vesting will occur in five equal tranches between September 2026 and September 2030, with a holding
restriction of at least five years from grant.
The initial exercise price of the options increases by £2.50 per year for vesting dates from September 2027 onwards.
As such, the exercise price for the options granted (prior to deductions for dividends as referenced below) is as
follows, which is the only performance condition applied to the plan in addition to continued employment:
Minimum exercise price (prior
to reductions for shareholder
Tranche
Percentage of LTOP Award
Vesting date
distribution)
1
20%
30 September 2026
£48.50
2
20%
30 September 2027
£51.00
3
20%
30 September 2028
£53.50
4
20%
30 September 2029
£56.00
5
20%
30 September 2030
£58.50
Dividends or other distributions to shareholders (other than share buy-backs) are deducted from the exercise price.
There are caps in place in relation to all options granted. Any options prevented from vesting due to the caps
are lapsed.
The table below summarises the movement in options under the 2022 LTOP during the year:
2026 2025
Number of Number of
options options
No. No.
As at 1 May
4,070,000
4,270,000
Granted during the year
–
–
Lapsed during the year
(135,000)
(200,000)
As at 30 April
3,935,000
4,070,000
192 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
2 Results for the year continued
2.5 Directors and employees continued
Fair value of 2022 LTOP options
The assessed fair value of the options granted, determined using a Monte Carlo simulation model, was
£19.35 million. The inputs into the model for the three grant dates were as follows:
Grant date
9 Feb 2023
10 Mar 2023
21 Mar 2023
Number of options
2,400,000
350,000
1,610,000
Share price at grant date (p)
4,308
4,039
4,070
Exercise price
Initial exercise prices from £48.50 for Tranche 1,
increasing by £2.50 for each Tranche
to £58.50 for Tranche 5
Dividend yield
0%
Risk free interest rate
3.26%
3.47%
3.22%
Share price volatility
30%
Expected life
Between circa 3.5 years (Tranche 1)
and 7.5 years (Tranche 5) from grant
Restrictive Share Plan (‘RSP’)
The RSP was approved by shareholders at the 2022 AGM. The RSP is designed to incentivise management
to deliver long-term performance. The RSP is an annual restrictive share award with the first awards granted
in September 2022, vesting in 2026 with a further one-year holding period. Participation in the plan is at the
discretion of the Remuneration Committee.
Annual awards are determined by the Remuneration Committee, however the maximum number of shares
under the RSP awards granted to participants will not exceed 175% of the salary of the CEO and 150% of the
salary of all other participating employees.
The vesting of awards is subject to remaining in service and the following two underpin conditions:
(i) The average Return on Equity over the four prior financial years must be at least 15%, commencing with the
financial year in which the RSP Awards are granted; and
(ii) Up to 20% of the award will be forfeited in the event of unsatisfactory progress against strategic and ESG
priorities over the relevant vesting period.
The vesting of awards is restricted to the level of each employee’s remuneration cap. The remuneration cap is
first applied to the 2022 LTOP to the extent that total remuneration would exceed the cap, followed by the RSP
if required. Any RSP awards in excess of the total remuneration cap will lapse immediately.
The table below summarises the movement in options under the RSPs:
2026 2025
Number of Number of
options options
No. No.
As at 1 May
189,949
189,949
As at 30 April
189,949
189,949
Fair value of RSPs
The fair values of RSP awards are equal to the share price at grant as these awards are not subject to market-
based performance conditions and they attract dividend equivalents. The values are fixed at grant.
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
193 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Cash settled share based payments
The cost of cash settled transactions is recognised as an expense over the vesting period measured by
reference to the fair value of the corresponding liability which is recognised on the Statement of Financial
Position. The liability is remeasured at fair value at each Balance Sheet date until settlement with changes in
fair value recognised in the Income Statement.
Performance Share Plan (PSP)
The PSP was approved by shareholders at the 2025 AGM. The PSP is designed to provide long-term retention
and alignment of Executive Directors’ interests with Shareholders. Participation in the plan is at the discretion
of the Remuneration Committee.
Under the PSP, awards will take the form of either:
(i) A conditional right to receive Shares which will be automatically transferred to the Participant following
vesting (a ‘Conditional Award’); or
(ii) A nil or nominal-cost option, exercisable by the Participant following vesting during a permitted exercise
period (extending not later than the tenth anniversary of the date of grant) (an ‘Option’), and
(iii) attract dividend equivalents.
The maximum market value of the Shares over which a Participant may be granted an Award under the PSP
in any financial year shall not exceed an amount equal to 400 per cent of the Participant’s gross annual basic
salary as at the date of grant.
The PSP is the grant of conditional share awards which vest after three years, subject to performance and
continued employment. The performance measures and targets for the 2025 PSP awards are set out in the
table below. The performance period is the three-year performance period ending on 30 April 2028, and
awards will vest subject to the satisfaction of the performance conditions, on the third anniversary of grant.
Following vesting, shares are subject to a further two-year holding period. The vesting of awards is restricted
to the level of each employee’s remuneration cap.
Threshold Maximum
Weighting (25% vesting) (100% vesting)
Growth in NAV per share plus dividends
45%
21.5%
27. 5%
Net cumulative operating cash generation before land payments
(FY26-28)
20%
£1,300m
£1,550m
ROCE (3-year average)
35%
10%
13%
The Remuneration Committee has discretion to adjust vesting outcomes to ensure they are fair and reflect
overall performance.
On 17 September 2025, a total of 202,535 nil-cost options were awarded, at a share price of 3,704p. Subject to
the satisfaction of performance conditions, the awards will vest three years from date of grant being
30 September 2025.
Measurement
Award date date
17 September 30 April
2025 2026
Fair value
3,704p
3,206p
Share price
3,704p
3,206p
Exercise price
3,704p
3,704p
The liability is accrued over the vesting period. The Income Statement is charged with an estimate for the
vesting of the ‘conditional award’ awarded subject to service and non-market performance conditions.
The charge to the Income Statement in respect of share based payments in the year relating to the PSP was
£1.0 million (2025: £nil), of which £0.7 million (2025: £nil) was attributable to key management. As at 30 April
2026, the total carrying amount of the liability based on the closing share price is £1.0 million (2025: £nil),
recorded in accruals. See Note 2.16.
194 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
2 Results for the year continued
2.5 Directors and employees continued
Pensions
The Group accounts for pensions under IAS 19 ‘Employee Benefits’. The Group has both defined benefit and
defined contribution plans. The defined benefit plan was closed to future accrual with effect from 1 April 2007.
For the defined benefit scheme, the obligations are measured using the projected unit credit method. The
calculation of the net obligation is performed by a qualified actuary. The operating and financing costs of
these plans are recognised separately in the Income Statement; service costs are set annually on the basis
of actuarial valuations of the scheme and financing costs are recognised in the period in which they arise.
Actuarial gains and losses are recognised immediately in the Statement of Comprehensive Income.
Pension contributions under defined contribution schemes are charged to the Income Statement as they fall due.
Defined contribution plan
Contributions amounting to £15.3 million (2025: £14.2 million) were paid into the defined contribution schemes
during the year. There were £2.6 million of contributions outstanding to the scheme at 30 April 2026
(2025: £2.7 million).
Defined benefit plan
As at 30 April 2026, the Group operated one defined benefit pension scheme which was closed to future
accrual with effect from 1 April 2007. This is a separate Trustee administered fund holding the pension plan
assets to meet long-term pension liabilities for some 154 past employees. The level of retirement benefit is
principally based on salary earned in the last three years of employment prior to leaving active service and is
linked to changes in inflation up to retirement.
The Berkeley Final Salary Plan is subject to an independent actuarial valuation at least every three years. The
triennial independent actuarial valuation is underway as at 30 April 2025, with finalisation due by 31 July 2026.
The current valuation was carried out as at 30 April 2022 and finalised on 30 June 2023. The method adopted
in the 2022 valuation was the projected unit credit method, which assumed no allowance for over performance
on investments both prior to and after retirement and inflation linked pension increases derived at each term
using Black Scholes Methodology with a volatility assumption of 1.40% per annum. The market value of the
Berkeley Final Salary Plan assets as at 1 May 2025 was £22.9 million and covered 117% of the scheme’s liabilities.
The Group made no additional voluntary contributions during the year (2025: £0.4 million).
Following the High Court ruling on 26 October 2018, regarding the equalisation of Guaranteed Minimum
Pension (‘GMP’) benefit, the plan was required to adjust benefits to remove the inequalities between the GMP
benefits awarded to males and females. On 20 November 2020, the High Court issued a supplementary ruling
in respect of GMP equalisation with regard to members who transferred out of the scheme prior to the ruling.
The plan has not yet completed a full review of the impact of GMP equalisation and no additional costs have
been recognised during the year (2025: £nil). In prior years an amount of £0.7 million has been allowed as a
past service cost.
Following the High Court ruling and decision handed down by the Court of Appeal on the Virgin Media Ltd v
NTL Pension Trustees II case, regarding the implications of the requirement under section 37 of the Pension
Schemes Act 1993 to obtain written actuarial confirmation (section 37 confirmation) to rule alterations of
contracted-out benefits (known as section 9(2B) rights) between 6 April 1997 and 5 April 2016, the government
announced that it would legislate to address the issues arising from the case. The government included
provisions in the Pension Schemes Bill which are intended to address the issues arising and to provide a
statutory solution to ‘potentially remediable alterations’ that required section 37 confirmation. The Pension
Schemes Bill received Royal Assent on 29 April 2026, officially becoming law as the Pension Schemes Act 2026.
The Act introduced a number of measures affecting the governance and operation of UK occupational pension
schemes. In particular, the trustee has considered the potential impact of the new legislative framework on the
Virgin Media Ltd v NTL Pension Trustees II Ltd decision. At the date of signing these financial statements, the
trustee is reviewing the Scheme’s historical documentation and amendment processes in light of the Virgin
Media ruling. While this review is ongoing, it is not currently possible to quantify the potential impact, if any,
on the Scheme’s liabilities. The trustee will take appropriate legal and actuarial advice and, where necessary,
implement remedial actions to ensure compliance.
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
195 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
For the purpose of IAS 19, the 2022 valuation was updated for 30 April 2026.
The most significant risks to which the plan exposes the Group are as follows:
— Inflation risk: A rise in inflation rates will lead to higher plan liabilities as a large proportion of the defined
benefit obligation is indexed in line with price inflation. This effect will be limited due to caps on inflationary
increases to protect the plan against extreme inflation.
— Investment risk: There is a risk that future investment performance fails to generate expected returns.
— Employer covenant risk: There is a risk that the strength of the employer covenant materially weakens which
may impact the ability to support the fund.
— Mortality risk: An increase in life expectancy would result in an increase to plan liabilities as a significant
proportion of the pension schemes’ obligations are to provide benefits for the life of the member.
The amounts recognised in the Statement of Financial Position are determined as follows:
2026 2025
£m £m
Present value of defined benefit obligations
(12.8)
(13.3)
Fair value of plan assets
15.3
15.6
Net surplus recognised in the Statement of Financial Position
2.5
2.3
Defined benefit Fair value Net defined
obligations plan assets benefit asset
2026 2025 2026 2025 2026 2025
£m £m £m £m £m £m
Balance at 1 May
(13.3)
(14.3)
15.6
15.9
2.3
1.6
Included in Income Statement:
Net interest
(0.7)
(0.7)
0.8
0.8
0.1
0.1
Included in Other Comprehensive Income:
Remeasurements:
Actuarial gain/(loss) arising from:
Demographic assumptions
(0.1)
0.2
–
–
(0.1)
0.2
Scheme experience
–
0.1
–
–
–
0.1
Financial assumptions
0.6
0.8
–
–
0.6
0.8
Return on plan assets
–
–
(0.4)
(0.9)
(0.4)
(0.9)
Other:
Contributions by the employer
–
–
–
0.4
–
0.4
Benefits paid out
0.7
0.6
(0.7)
(0.6)
–
–
Balance at 30 April
(12.8)
(13.3)
15.3
15.6
2.5
2.3
Cumulative actuarial gains and losses recognised in equity:
2026 2025
£m £m
Cumulative amounts of losses recognised in the Statement of
Comprehensive Income at 1 May
(8.2)
(8.4)
Net actuarial gain recognised in the year
0.1
0.2
Cumulative amounts of losses recognised in the
Statement of Comprehensive Income at 30 April
(8.1)
(8.2)
196 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
2 Results for the year continued
2.5 Directors and employees continued
The fair value of the assets was as follows:
30 April 2026 30 April 2025
Long-term value Long-term value
£m £m
Absolute return bonds
5.0
4.8
Liquidity driven investment
4.1
4.5
Asset backed securities
5.0
4.8
Cash
1.2
1.5
Fair value of plan assets
15.3
15.6
All equity securities and government bonds have quoted prices in active markets. All Government bonds are issued
by European Governments and are AAA- or AA- rated. All other plan assets are not quoted in an active market.
History of asset values
30 April 30 April 30 April 30 April 30 April
2026 2025 2024 2023 2022
£m £m £m £m £m
Fair value of plan assets
15.3
15.6
15.9
16.2
21.4
Present value of defined benefit obligations
(12.8)
(13.3)
(14.3)
(14.5)
(19.1)
Net surplus in the plan
2.5
2.3
1.6
1.7
2.3
Actuarial assumptions
The major assumptions used by the actuary for the 30 April 2026 valuation were as follows:
30 April 30 April
2026 2025
Discount rate
6.05%
5.55%
Inflation assumption (RPI)
3.65%
3.30%
Inflation assumption (CPI)
3.20%
2.85%
Rate of increase in pensions in payment post 97 (pre-97 receive 3% p.a. increases)
3.85%
3.75%
The mortality assumptions are the standard S3PMA/S3PFA_M CMI_2024_X (1.0%) (2025: S3PMA/S3PFA_M
CMI_2023_X (1.0%)) base table for males and females, both adjusted for each individual’s year of birth to allow
for future improvements in mortality rates. The life expectancy of male and female pensioners (now aged 65)
retiring at age 65 on the Balance Sheet date is 21.2 years and 23.0 years respectively (2025: 20.8 and 22.8 years
respectively). The life expectancy of male and female deferred pensioners (now aged 45) retiring at age 65
after the Balance Sheet date is 22.1 years and 24.1 years respectively (2025: 21.7 and 24.0 years respectively).
Sensitivity analysis
The calculation of the defined benefit obligation is sensitive to the assumptions set out above. The following
table summarises how the impact on the defined benefit obligation at the end of the reporting period would
have increased/(decreased) as a result of a change in the respective assumptions.
Change in
Change in defined benefit
assumption obligation
Discount rate
+0.5% p.a.
£(0.7)m
Rate of inflation
+0.25% p.a.
£0.2m
Rate of mortality
+1 year
£0.4m
These calculations provide an approximate guide to the sensitivity of results and may not be as accurate as a
full valuation carried out on these assumptions. In practice, changes in some of the assumptions are correlated
and so each assumption change is unlikely to occur in isolation, as shown above.
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
197 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Funding
The Group has no obligation to pay contributions to its defined benefit plan and expects to pay £nil in the year
ending 30 April 2027 (2026: £nil).
2.6 Taxation
The Group applies IAS 12 ‘Income Taxes’ in accounting for taxes on income. Income tax payable on taxable
profits (current tax) is recognised as an expense in the periods in which the profits arise.
The taxation expense represents the sum of current tax payable, including Residential Property Developer
Tax (‘RPDT’), and deferred tax. Current tax and deferred tax are provided at the amounts expected to be
paid (or received) using the tax rules and laws that have been enacted, or substantially enacted, by the
reporting date.
The tax charge for the year is as follows:
2026 2025
£m £m
Current tax (including RPDT)
UK current tax payable
(103.9)
(123.5)
Adjustments in respect of previous years
(4.3)
7.4
(108.2)
(116.1)
Deferred tax (including RPDT)
Deferred tax movements
(26.1)
(28.3)
Adjustments in respect of previous years
1.2
(2.5)
(24.9)
(30.8)
(133.1)
(146.9)
Tax on items recognised directly in equity is as follows:
2026 2025
£m £m
Deferred tax in respect of employee share schemes (note 2.18)
(0.8)
1.2
Corporation tax is calculated at 25% (2025: 25%) of the estimated assessable profit for the year. Taking into
account RPDT at a rate of 4% (2025: 4%), the weighted statutory rate of corporate income tax is 29% for the
year (2025: 29%).
The tax charge assessed for the year differs from the weighted statutory rate of corporate income tax of 29%
(2025: 29%). The differences are explained below:
2026 2025
£m £m
Profit before tax
451.4
528.9
Tax on profit at standard UK corporation tax rate (including RPDT)
130.9
153.4
Effects of:
•
Expenses not deductible for tax purposes
2.0
1.7
•
Tax effect of share of results of joint ventures
0.3
0.6
•
Adjustments in respect of previous years
3.1
(4. 9)
•
Other rate impacting adjustments
(2.1)
(2.0)
•
Other
(1.1)
(1.9)
Tax charge
133.1
146.9
The Group has an overall tax charge for the year of £133.1 million (2025: £146.9 million) including UK current tax
payable of £103.9 million (2025: £123.5 million). The effective tax rate for the year is 29.5% (2025: 27.8%).
198 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
2 Results for the year continued
2.6 Taxation continued
In December 2021, the OECD published its proposals in relation to Global Anti-Base Erosion Rules, which
provide for an internationally coordinated system of taxation to ensure that large multinational groups pay
a minimum level of corporate income tax in countries in which they operate. The UK Finance (No. 2) Act
2023, which implements Pillar Two, was enacted by the UK Government on 11 July 2023. Owing to its size
and multinational operations, the Berkeley Group is within the scope of the OECD Pillar Two model rules for
the accounting period 30 April 2025 onwards. The Group has undertaken a review and expects to meet the
transitional safe harbour provisions meaning the top up tax will not be payable. There is no impact on the
Group’s results for the year ended 30 April 2026 (30 April 2025: £nil). The Group applies the exception to
recognising and disclosing information about deferred tax assets and liabilities related to Pillar Two income
taxes, as provided in the amendments to IAS 12.
2.7 Earnings per ordinary share
Basic earnings per share (EPS) are calculated as the profit for the financial year attributable to shareholders of
the Group divided by the weighted average number of shares in issue during the year.
For the year ended 30 April
2026
2025
Profit attributable to shareholders (£m)
318.3
382.0
Weighted average no. of shares (million)
96.0
102.7
Basic EPS (pence)
331.6
371.8
For diluted earnings per ordinary share, the weighted average number of shares in issue is adjusted to assume
the conversion of all potentially dilutive ordinary shares.
At 30 April 2026, the Group had two (2025: two) categories of potentially dilutive ordinary shares: 0.1 million
(2025: 0.4 million) share options under the 2011 LTIP and 0.1 million share options (2025: 0.1 million) under the
Restrictive Share Plan.
A calculation is undertaken to determine the number of shares that could have been acquired at fair value based
on the aggregate of the exercise price of each share option and the fair value of future services to be supplied to
the Group which is the unamortised share based payments charge. The difference between the number of shares
that could have been acquired at fair value and the total number of options is used in the diluted EPS calculation.
For the year ended 30 April
2026
2025
Profit used to determine diluted EPS (£m)
318.3
382.0
Weighted average number of shares (million)
96.0
102.7
Adjustments for:
•
Share options – 2011 LTIP
0.1
0.4
•
Share options – Restrictive Share Plan
0.1
0.1
Shares used to determine diluted EPS (million)
96.2
103.2
•
Diluted EPS (pence)
331.1
370.0
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
199 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
2.8 Intangible assets
Where the cost of acquiring new and additional interests in subsidiaries and businesses exceeds the fair
value of the net assets acquired, the resulting premium on acquisition (goodwill) is capitalised and its
subsequent measurement is based on annual impairment reviews and impairment reviews performed
where an impairment indicator exists, with any impairment losses recognised immediately in the Income
Statement. Goodwill is allocated to cash-generating units for the purpose of impairment testing. The
allocation is made to those cash-generating units or groups of cash-generating units that are expected to
benefit from the business combination in which the goodwill arose.
Goodwill
£m
Cost:
At 1 May 2025 and 30 April 2026 17.2
Accumulated impairment:
At 1 May 2025 and 30 April 2026 –
Net book value:
At 1 May 2025 and 30 April 2026 17.2
Cost:
At 1 May 2024 and 30 April 2025 17.2
Accumulated impairment:
At 1 May 2024 and 30 April 2025 –
Net book value:
At 1 May 2024 and 30 April 2025 17.2
The goodwill balance relates solely to the acquisition of the 50% of the ordinary share capital of St James
Group Limited, completed on 7 November 2006, that was not already owned by the Group. The goodwill
balance is tested annually for impairment. The recoverable amount has been determined on the basis of the
value in use of the business using the current five year pre-tax forecasts. Key assumptions are as follows:
(i) cash flows beyond a five year period are not extrapolated; and
(ii) pre-tax discount rate of 11.4% (2025: 11.0%) based on the Group’s weighted average cost of capital.
The Directors have identified no reasonably possible change in a key assumption which would give rise to an
impairment charge.
200 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
2 Results for the year continued
2.9 Investment property
Land and buildings being developed or held to generate capital appreciation and to earn rental income are
recognised as investment properties. Investment property is measured at cost less accumulated depreciation
and impairment losses. Once the asset is ready for use, depreciation is provided to write off the cost of the
assets on a straight line basis to the residual values over their estimated useful lives at the following annual rates:
Land not depreciated
Structure 100 years
Plant, machinery and electrical 30 years
Fixtures and fittings 25 years
Furniture 7 years
Any gain or loss on the disposal of investment property is recognised in profit or loss.
For disclosure purposes, the fair value of the investment property is assessed annually at the reporting date,
based on internal valuations. The fair value reflects, among other things, rental income from current leases
and other assumptions that market participants would use when pricing investment property under current
market conditions.
Under
development Completed Total
£m £m £m
Cost:
At 1 May 2025
145.7
–
145.7
Transfer from inventory
82.4
–
82.4
Additions
69.2
–
69.2
Transfer to completed
(105.2)
105.2
–
At 30 April 2026
192.1
105.2
297. 3
Accumulated depreciation:
At 1 May 2025
–
–
–
Charge for the year
–
0.1
0.1
At 30 April 2026
–
0.1
0.1
Carrying amount:
At 1 May 2025
145.7
–
145.7
At 30 April 2026
192.1
105.1
297.2
During the year, £82.4 million (2025: £143.7 million) of cost was transferred from inventory to investment
property in relation to assets under development given management’s decision to hold these assets in the
Group’s BTR platform to earn rental income and for capital appreciation. Management uses criteria to ensure
that judgement is exercised consistently on the appropriate point of cost transfer, the main criteria being the
formal decision to contract for the transfer of ownership of the building under development to asset specific
entities which form part of the BTR platform.
As at 30 April 2026, the first two assets under development held in the Group’s BTR platform completed (2025:
none) and depreciation has been provided to write off the cost of the assets to the residual value over their
useful lives (2025: not applicable).
As at 30 April 2026, the Directors have internally assessed the fair value of completed investment property at
£118.0 million based upon rental values and investment yields, and including a discount for stabilisation risk.
As at 30 April 2025, the Directors internally assessed the fair value of investment property under development,
which approximated cost.
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
201 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
For investment property under development, fair value approximates cost. All assets include a discount to
market value to reflect stabilisation risk and an allowance for construction risk in the remaining build process,
this is applied on an asset by asset basis depending on stage of construction.
The fair value assessment has been undertaken as if the investment properties were sold directly as property
assets with purchaser costs deducted accordingly. In all likelihood, the assets would be sold in their Special
Purpose Vehicles consistent with recent UK transactions of this nature and would therefore attract a lower
purchaser cost due to reduced Stamp Duty Land Tax. Under this approach the valuation would be £122.4 million
for completed assets.
2.10 Property, plant and equipment
Property, plant and equipment is carried at historic purchase cost less accumulated depreciation. Cost
includes the original purchase price of the asset and the costs attributable to bringing the asset to its
working condition for its intended use. Depreciation is provided to write off the cost of the assets on a
straight line basis to their residual value over their estimated useful lives at the following annual rates:
Freehold buildings 25–50 years
Fixtures, fittings and equipment 3–12 years
Motor vehicles 4 years
Freehold property disclosed in the notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements consists of both freehold
land and freehold buildings. No depreciation is provided on freehold land. Computer equipment is included
within fixtures and fittings. The assets’ residual values, carrying values and useful lives are reviewed on an
annual basis and adjusted if appropriate at each Balance Sheet date. Where an impairment is identified, the
recoverable amount of the asset is identified and an impairment loss, where appropriate, is recognised in
the Income Statement.
Subsequent costs are included in the assets’ carrying amount or recognised as a separate asset, as
appropriate, only when it is probable that future economic benefits associated with the item will flow to
the Group and the cost of the item can be measured reliably. The carrying amount of the replaced part is
derecognised. All other repairs and maintenance are charged to the Income Statement during the financial
period in which they are incurred.
Gains and losses on disposals are determined by comparing the proceeds with the carrying amount and are
recognised within net operating expenses in the Income Statement.
Freehold Fixtures, fittings Motor
property & equipment vehicles Total
£m £m £m £m
Cost:
At 1 May 2025
30.9
6.3
2.1
39.3
Transfer from inventory
2.7
–
–
2.7
Disposals
(21.0)
(0.1)
(0.2)
(21.3)
At 30 April 2026
12.6
6.2
1.9
20.7
Accumulated depreciation:
At 1 May 2025
5.8
5.4
0.9
12.1
Charge for the year
0.4
0.5
0.3
1.2
Disposals
(4.0)
(0.1)
(0.1)
(4.2)
At 30 April 2026
2.2
5.8
1.1
9.1
Net book value:
At 1 May 2025
25.1
0.9
1.2
27. 2
At 30 April 2026
10.4
0.4
0.8
11.6
202 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
2 Results for the year continued
2.10 Property, plant and equipment continued
Freehold Fixtures, fittings Motor
property & equipment vehicles Total
£m £m £m £m
Cost:
At 1 May 2024
30.9
5.8
2.3
39.0
Additions
–
0.8
0.2
1.0
Disposals
–
(0.3)
(0.4)
(0.7)
At 30 April 2025
30.9
6.3
2.1
39.3
Accumulated depreciation:
At 1 May 2024
5.1
5.0
0.9
11.0
Charge for the year
0.7
0.6
0.3
1.6
Disposals
–
(0.2)
(0.3)
(0.5)
At 30 April 2025
5.8
5.4
0.9
12.1
Net book value:
At 1 May 2024
25.8
0.8
1.4
28.0
At 30 April 2025
25.1
0.9
1.2
27. 2
2.11 Right-of-use assets and lease liabilities
The lease liability is initially measured at the present value of the remaining lease payments, discounted
using the Group’s incremental borrowing rate. The Group determines the borrowing rate from external
financing sources and adjusts this to reflect the term of the lease and the type of assets subject to
the lease. The lease term comprises the non-cancellable period of the contract, together with periods
covered by an option to extend the lease where the Group is reasonably certain to exercise that option.
Subsequently, the lease liability is measured by increasing the carrying amount to reflect interest on the
lease liability, and reducing it by the lease payments made. The lease liability is remeasured when the Group
changes its assessment of whether it will exercise an extension or termination option.
Right-of-use assets are initially measured at cost, comprising the initial measurement of the lease liability,
plus any initial direct costs and an estimate of asset retirement obligations, less any lease incentives.
Subsequently, right-of-use assets are measured at cost, less any accumulated depreciation and any
accumulated impairment losses, and are adjusted for certain remeasurements of the lease liability.
Depreciation is calculated on a straight line basis over the length of the lease.
The Group has elected to apply exemptions for short-term leases and leases for which the underlying asset
is of low value. For these leases, payments are charged to the Income Statement on a straight line basis
over the term of the relevant lease.
Right-of-use assets are presented separately in non-current assets on the face of the Consolidated
Statement of Financial Position and lease liabilities are shown separately on the Consolidated Statement of
Financial Position in current liabilities and non-current liabilities depending on the length of the lease term.
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
203 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Leasehold Motor
property vehicles Total
£m £m £m
Cost:
At 1 May 2025
15.6
1.0
16.6
Additions
1.6
0.1
1.7
At 30 April 2026
17.2
1.1
18.3
Accumulated depreciation:
At 1 May 2025
11.6
0.8
12.4
Charge for the year
2.0
0.1
2.1
At 30 April 2026
13.6
0.9
14.5
Carrying amount:
At 1 May 2025
4.0
0.2
4.2
At 30 April 2026
3.6
0.2
3.8
Lease liabilities included in the Consolidated Statement of Financial Position:
2026 2025
£m £m
Current
2.1
2.0
Non-current
1.9
2.3
Total
4.0
4.3
Amounts recognised in the Consolidated Income Statement:
2026 2025
£m £m
Depreciation charged on right-of-use assets – Office buildings
2.0
2.1
Depreciation charged on right-of-use assets – Motor vehicles
0.1
0.1
Interest on lease liabilities
0.2
0.2
Total
2.3
2.4
The total cash outflow for leases for the year ended 30 April 2026 was £2.3 million (2025: £2.3 million).
204 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
2 Results for the year continued
2.12 Investments in joint ventures
Joint ventures are accounted for using the equity method (equity accounted investees) and are initially
recognised at cost. The Consolidated Financial Statements include the Group’s share of the total comprehensive
income and equity movements of equity accounted investees, from the date that joint control commences until
the date that joint control ceases. When the Group’s share of losses exceeds its interest in an equity accounted
investee, the Group’s carrying amount is reduced to £nil and recognition of further losses is discontinued except
to the extent that the Group has incurred legal or constructive obligations or made payments on behalf of an
investee. For loans to joint ventures, the Group assesses at each reporting date, the value of the loans against
future cash flows. For any credit losses, the carrying value of the asset is reduced through the write-off of the
loan amounts recognised in the Income Statement within share of profit or loss in joint ventures. Management
fees received and other recharges to joint ventures are recorded in the Income Statement.
2026 2025
£m £m
Loans
57.3
55.5
Share of post acquisition reserves
145.8
187.9
203.1
243.4
Details of the joint ventures are provided in Notes 2.26 and 2.28.
2026 2025
£m £m
At 1 May
243.4
227.0
Group’s share of profit after taxation for the year
3.0
14.7
Increase in loans to joint ventures
1.8
1.7
Dividends from joint ventures (St Edward)
(45.1)
–
At 30 April
203.1
243.4
The Group’s share of joint ventures’ net assets, income and expenses is comprised as follows:
St Edward Other Total
2026 £m £m £m
Cash and cash equivalents
226.3
1.1
227.4
Other current assets
223.7
62.5
286.2
Current assets
450.0
63.6
513.6
Current liabilities
(79.0)
(4.1)
(83.1)
Non–current financial liabilities*
(69.5)
(69.4)
(138.9)
Net assets/(liabilities) (at 100%)
301.5
(9.9)
291.6
Group share of net assets/(liabilities) (50%)
150.8
(5.0)
145.8
Loans to joint ventures
22.6
34.7
57. 3
Total interest in joint ventures
173.4
29.7
203.1
Revenue
111.3
0.3
111.6
Costs
(104.3)
(6.4)
(110.7)
Operating profit/(loss)
7.0
(6.1)
0.9
Net finance income/(costs)
6.4
(0.7)
5.7
Profit/(loss) before taxation for the year
13.4
(6.8)
6.6
Tax charge
(0.5)
–
(0.5)
Profit/(loss) after taxation and total comprehensive income/
(expense) (100%)
12.9
(6.8)
6.1
Group share of post tax profit/(loss) of joint ventures (50%)
6.4
(3.4)
3.0
* Non-current financial liabilities include amounts owed to joint venture partners.
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
205 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
The other joint ventures in the table comprise asset specific 50/50 joint ventures – Latimer Developments
Limited and SEGRO Properties Limited.
St Edward Other Total
2025 £m £m £m
Cash and cash equivalents
278.1
1.5
279.6
Other current assets
262.6
63.5
326.1
Current assets
540.7
65.0
605.7
Current liabilities
(89.0)
(2.3)
(91.3)
Non–current financial liabilities*
(72.9)
(65.7)
(138.6)
Net assets/(liabilities) (at 100%)
378.8
(3.0)
375.8
Group share of net assets/(liabilities) (50%)
189.4
(1.5)
187.9
Loans to joint ventures
22.6
32.9
55.5
Total interest in joint ventures
212.0
31.4
243.4
Revenue
144.6
0.2
144.8
Costs
(122.9)
(1.5)
(124.4)
Operating profit/(loss)
21.7
(1.3)
20.4
Net finance income/(costs)
10.2
(0.6)
9.6
Profit/(loss) before taxation for the year
31.9
(1.9)
30.0
Tax charge
(0.6)
–
(0.6)
Profit/(loss) after taxation and total comprehensive income/
(expense) (100%)
31.3
(1.9)
29.4
Group share of post tax profit/(loss) of joint ventures (50%)
15.7
(1.0)
14.7
* Non-current financial liabilities include amounts owed to joint venture partners.
2.13 Inventories
Property in the course of development and completed units are valued at the lower of cost and net
realisable value. Direct cost comprises the cost of land, material and development costs but excludes
indirect overheads. Provision is made, where appropriate, to reduce the value of inventories and work in
progress to their net realisable value.
Land purchased for development, including land in the course of development, is initially recorded at cost.
Where such land is purchased on deferred settlement terms, and the cost differs from the amount that
will subsequently be paid in settling the liability, this difference is charged as a finance cost in the Income
Statement over the period to settlement.
As residential development is largely speculative by nature, not all inventories are covered by forward
sales contracts. Furthermore, due to the nature of the Group’s activity and in particular, the scale of its
developments and the length of the development cycle, the Group has to allocate site-wide development
costs between units being built and/or completed in the current year and those for future years. It also has
to forecast the costs to complete on such developments.
206 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
2 Results for the year continued
2.13 Inventories continued
In making such assessments and allocations in determining each development’s site margin which is used
to estimate cost of sales when revenue is recognised for each unit, there is a degree of inherent estimation
uncertainty. In particular this is due to the need to take account of future direct input costs, sales prices and
the need to allocate all site-wide costs on an appropriate basis to reflect the overall level of development
risk, including planning risk. The Group has established internal controls designed to effectively assess
and centrally review inventory carrying values and ensure the appropriateness of the estimates made.
These assessments and allocations evolve over the life of the development in line with the risk profile, and
accordingly the margin recognised reflects these evolving estimates. Similarly, these estimates impact the
carrying value of inventory at each reporting date as this is a function of costs incurred in the year and the
allocation of inventory to costs of sales on each property sold.
An increase or decrease to estimated costs recognised in the year, by virtue of a 1% change to forecast
development margin, would lead to a change in cost of sales and inventory of £17.4 million in the current
financial year (2025: £17.6 million). This sensitivity is based on a reasonably possible scenario and is
provided in the absence of a change to any other factor affecting future gross margins on the Group’s
developments, such as a change in future sales prices.
In addition, the Group has consistently applied its approach to margin recognition in relation to the Group’s
particularly complex, long-term regeneration developments where whole-site costs are accelerated to the
early stages of the development to reflect the greater uncertainty and the evolution of risk over the life
of such developments. These developments, where the development life cycle is typically greater than
10 years, are considered to be particularly susceptible to potential downward shifts in profitability due to
the cyclical nature of the property market and its impact on both revenue and costs. As such, the inherent
estimation uncertainty is increased.
A fundamental principle of the Group’s accounting policy is to reduce the possibility of recognising margin
in the early stages of a development that could subsequently reverse. As such, for these long-term sites
with greatest estimation uncertainty, a greater proportion of whole-site costs is recognised during the
earlier stages of the development up to a point of inflection when such developments are deemed to be
sufficiently derisked. Subsequent to this inflection point, and should the uncertainties have not materialised,
margin would increase as the visibility over projected revenue and costs across the development improves.
As at 30 April 2026, the greater proportion of whole-site costs recognised in either the current or previous
financial years during the earlier stages of the development for the Group’s particularly complex, long-
term sites amounted to 4% (2025: 4%) of the future estimated revenue for the specific sites. As with all
judgements involving estimation over a long-term horizon, the outcome of future events may affect the
eventual accounting outcome.
2026 2025
£m £m
Land not under development
563.1
554.3
Work in progress: Land cost
1,619.7
1,692.9
Total land
2,182.8
2,247.2
Work in progress: Build cost
2,228.8
2,467. 2
Completed units
331.7
337. 8
Total inventories
4,743.3
5,052.2
The key areas of estimation uncertainty described above are relevant to the work in progress and completed
stock balances as at 30 April 2026.
During the year, an amount of £82.4 million (2025: £143.7 million) was transferred from inventory to investment
property. Further disclosure is set out in Note 2.9.
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
207 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
2.14 Trade and other receivables
Trade receivables are recognised initially at fair value and subsequently measured at amortised cost
using the effective interest method, less provision for impairment. Expected credit losses are based on
the difference between the contracted cash flows due in accordance with the contract and all the cash
flows that the Group expects to receive, discounted on an approximation of the original effective interest
rate. For trade receivables the Group does not track changes in credit risk, but instead recognises a loss
allowance based on lifetime expected credit losses at each reporting date. The carrying amount of the asset
is reduced through the use of an allowance account, and the amount of the loss is recognised in the Income
Statement within net operating expenses. When a trade receivable is not collectible, it is written off against
the allowance account for trade receivables. Subsequent recoveries of amounts previously written off are
credited against net operating expense in the Income Statement.
2026 2025
£m £m
Trade receivables
67.8
47. 2
Other receivables
29.3
18.6
Prepayments and accrued income
22.8
23.0
119.9
88.8
Further disclosures relating to trade receivables are set out in Note 2.24.
2.15 Cash and cash equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents comprise cash balances in hand and at the bank, including bank overdrafts
repayable on demand which form part of the Group’s cash management, for which offset arrangements
across Group businesses have been applied where appropriate.
2026 2025
£m £m
Cash and cash equivalents
1,023.3
1,015.2
Cash and cash equivalents are held at floating interest rates linked to the UK base rate and money market rates,
as applicable.
Cash equivalents comprise amounts placed in fixed term deposit and notice accounts which are all held in
order to meet short-term cash requirements and are subject to an insignificant risk of changes in value. Cash
equivalents include an amount of £124.9 million (2025: £150.8 million) that is accessible up to 95 days (2025:
between 90 and 120 days).
2.16 Trade and other payables
New property deposits and on account contract receipts are held within current trade and other payables.
Deposits and on account contract receipts are non-refundable and are recorded as a liability on receipt.
They are released to the Income Statement, as revenue, upon legal completion.
Trade and other payables on normal terms are not interest bearing and are stated at their nominal value
which is considered to be their fair value. Trade payables on extended terms are recorded at their fair value
at the date of acquisition of the asset to which they relate. The discount to nominal value is amortised over
the period of the credit term and charged to finance costs.
Deferred revenue relates to consideration received in advance of units being delivered. Revenue is
recognised in the Income Statement as control is passed to the customer, which has either been determined
as the point of legal completion or, on contracts where the customer controls the property during
construction, over time with reference to the stage of completion.
208 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
2 Results for the year continued
2.16 Trade and other payables continued
2026 2025
£m £m
Current
Trade payables
(751.6)
(838.1)
Deposits and on account contract receipts
(639.1)
(711.5)
Other taxes and social security
(3.5)
(5.5)
Deferred income
(29.2)
(37. 2)
Accruals
(156.7)
(166.1)
(1,580.1)
(1,758.4)
Non-current
Trade payables
(372.3)
(462. 8)
Total trade and other payables
(1,952.4)
(2,221.2)
The reduction in deferred income of £11.0 million (2025: £30.9 million) in the year has been recorded as revenue
in the Income Statement.
All amounts included above are unsecured. The total of £3.5 million (2025: £5.5 million) for other taxes and
social security includes £0.5 million (2025: £2.7 million) for Employer’s National Insurance provision in respect
of share based payments.
Further disclosures relating to current trade and non-current trade payables are set out in Note 2.24.
2.17 Provisions for liabilities and charges
Provisions are recognised when the Group has a present legal or constructive obligation as a result of past
events, and it is probable that an outflow of resources will be required to settle that obligation, and the
amount has been reliably estimated.
The Group makes assumptions to determine the timing and its best estimate of the quantum of its
construction and other liabilities for which provisions are held.
Provisions include a best estimate of the expected value of its post completion development obligations in
respect of the construction of the Group’s portfolio of complex mixed use property developments which are
expected to be incurred in the ordinary course of business, based on historical experience of the Group’s
sites and current site-specific risks, including matters relating to building fire-safety, but which are uncertain
in terms of timing and quantum. Provisions are discounted to present value where the effect is material.
The Group continually reviews the identified risks that it is aware of for the Group’s portfolio of
developments to ensure that the amount of the provision remains appropriate. The increase in the year
relates to post completion items on a number of sites including matters relating to building fire-safety. The
Group continually reviews its utilisation of this provision and in recognition that the risk of post completion
development obligations reduces over time, releases any unutilised provision to the Income Statement on a
systematic basis across the 10 years following completion.
If costs estimated in the provisions are overstated or understated by 10%, this would lead to a change in
cost of sales and provision of £22.6 million in the current financial year (2025: £23.0 million).
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
209 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Post completion
development Other
provisions provisions Total
£m £m £m
At 1 May 2025
(217.5)
(12.1)
(229.6)
Utilised
26.2
–
26.2
Released
4.6
0.7
5.3
Charged to the Income Statement
(27.7)
(0.5)
(28.2)
At 30 April 2026
(214.4)
(11.9)
(226.3)
Post completion
development Other
provisions provisions Total
£m £m £m
At 1 May 2024
(200.6)
(9.2)
(209.8)
Utilised
12.1
0.1
12.2
Released
7.0
1.4
8.4
Charged to the Income Statement
(36.0)
(4.4)
(40.4)
At 30 April 2025
(217.5)
(12.1)
(229.6)
2026 2025
£m £m
Non-current
(165.8)
(153.6)
Current
(60.5)
(76.0)
Total
(226.3)
(229.6)
2.18 Deferred tax
Deferred taxation is the tax expected to be payable or recoverable on differences between the carrying
amounts of assets and liabilities in the financial statements and corresponding tax bases used in the
computation of taxable profit, and is accounted for using the Balance Sheet liability method. Deferred tax
liabilities are generally recognised on all taxable temporary differences. Deferred tax assets are recognised
to the extent that it is probable that taxable profits will be available against which deductible temporary
differences can be utilised. Such assets and liabilities are not recognised if the temporary difference arises
from goodwill, or from the initial recognition (except in a business combination) of other assets and liabilities
in a transaction that affects neither the taxable profit nor the accounting profit, or from differences relating to
investments in subsidiaries to the extent that it is probable that they will not reverse in the foreseeable future.
Deferred taxation is calculated at the tax rates that are expected to apply in the period when the liability is
settled or the asset is realised based on tax laws and rates that have been enacted or substantively enacted
at the Balance Sheet date. The carrying value of deferred tax assets is reviewed at each Balance Sheet
date and reduced to the extent that it is no longer probable that sufficient taxable profits will be available
against which taxable temporary differences can be utilised. Deferred taxation is charged or credited to the
Income Statement, except when it relates to items charged or credited directly to reserves, in which case
the deferred taxation is also dealt with in reserves.
Deferred taxation assets and liabilities are offset when there is a legally enforceable right to offset current
tax assets against current tax liabilities and when the deferred taxation assets and liabilities relate to
income taxes levied by the same taxation authority on either the taxable entity or different taxable entities
where there is an intention to settle the balances on a net basis.
210 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
2 Results for the year continued
2.18 Deferred tax continued
The movement on the deferred tax account is as follows:
Accelerated
capital Unrealised Other timing
allowances inventory profit differences Total
£m £m £m £m
At 1 May 2025
(2.5)
68.2
21.6
87.3
Adjustments in respect of previous years
–
1.4
(0.2)
1.2
Credited/(charged) to the Income
Statement in the year
3.0
(16.3)
(12.8)
(26.1)
Credited/(charged) to the Income Statement
in the year
3.0
(16.3)
(12.8)
(26.1)
Credited to equity in year (note 2.6)
–
–
(0.8)
(0.8)
At 30 April 2026
0.5
53.3
7.8
61.6
Accelerated
capital Unrealised Other timing
allowances inventory profit differences Total
£m £m £m £m
At 1 May 2024
(2.5)
79.7
39.7
116.9
Adjustments in respect of previous years
–
(0.9)
(1.6)
(2.5)
Charged to the Income Statement in the year
–
(10.6)
(17.7)
(28.3)
Adjustment in respect of change of tax rate for
future periods (note 2.6)
–
–
–
–
Charged to the Income Statement in the year
–
(10.6)
(17.7)
(28.3)
Charged to equity in year (note 2.6)
–
–
1.2
1.2
At 30 April 2025
(2.5)
68.2
21.6
87. 3
Other timing differences primarily related to deferred tax assets held in relation to long-term incentive
schemes, bonuses and provisions.
Deferred tax is calculated in full on temporary differences at the tax rates that are expected to apply for the
period when the asset is realised and the liability is settled.
All deferred tax assets are available for offset against deferred tax liabilities and hence the net deferred tax
asset at 30 April 2026 is £61.6 million (2025: £87.3 million).
Deferred tax assets of £20.8 million (2025: £39.9 million) are expected to be recovered after more than one year.
The carrying value of deferred tax assets is reviewed at each Balance Sheet date and reduced to the extent that
it is no longer probable that there will be sufficient available profits to offset all or part of the asset. There are
no unrecognised deferred tax assets as at 30 April 2026 (2025: £nil).
The deferred tax credited to equity during the year was as follows:
2026 2025
£m £m
Deferred tax movement in the year in respect of employee share schemes (note 2.6)
(0.8)
1.2
Cumulative deferred tax credited to equity at 1 May
20.0
18.8
Cumulative deferred tax credited to equity at 30 April
19.2
20.0
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
211 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
2.19 Share capital and share premium
Ordinary shares are classified as equity. Incremental costs directly attributable to the issue of new shares or
options are shown in equity as a deduction, net of tax, from the proceeds.
Where any Group company purchases the Company’s equity share capital (treasury shares), the
consideration paid, including any directly attributable incremental costs (net of income taxes) is deducted
from equity attributable to the Company’s equity holders until the shares are cancelled, sold or reissued.
Where such shares are subsequently sold or reissued, any consideration received, net of any directly
attributable incremental transaction costs and the related income tax effects, is included in equity
attributable to the Company’s equity holders.
The movements on allotted and fully paid share capital for the Company in the year were as follows:
Ordinary shares
Share capital
Share premium
2026 2025 2026 2025 2026 2025
No ’000 No ’000 £m £m £m £m
Issued
At start of year
107, 372
114,712
6.0
6.2
49.8
49.8
Shares cancelled
(6,279)
(3,321)
(0.4)
(0.2)
–
–
Share consolidation
–
(4,019)
–
–
–
–
At end of year
101,093
107, 372
5.6
6.0
49.8
49.8
On 9 September 2024, a share consolidation was undertaken which reduced the Company’s ordinary share
capital, net of treasury and EBT shares, by 3.51%. The share consolidation replaced the total number of existing
ordinary shares of 114.5 million, with a nominal value of 5.4141 pence each, into a reduced number of new
ordinary shares of 110.5 million, each at a nominal value of 5.6110 pence at the time of the consolidation.
Each ordinary share of 5.6110 pence is a voting share in the capital of the Company, is entitled to participate in
the profits of the Company and on the winding up is entitled to participate in the assets of the Company.
During the 2026 financial year, 6,279 thousand shares were repurchased (2025: 3,321 thousand) for a
total consideration of £233.0 million, excluding transaction costs (2025: £129.7 million). These shares were
subsequently cancelled.
On 11 September 2025, 200 thousand ordinary shares (2025: 170 thousand) were transferred out of treasury
to the Employee Benefit Trust.
On 30 September 2025, 189 thousand ordinary shares (2025: 178 thousand) were transferred from the
Employee Benefit Trust to Executive Directors to satisfy the exercise of options under the 2011 LTIP.
At 30 April 2026, there were 57 thousand shares held in trust (2025: 46 thousand) by the Employee Benefit
Trust. The market value of these shares at 30 April 2026 was £1.8 million (2025: £1.9 million).
At 30 April 2026, there were 8,106 thousand (2025: 8,306 thousand) treasury shares held by the Group.
The market value of the shares at 30 April 2026 was £259.9 million (2025: £346.4 million).
2.20 Reserves
The movement in reserves is set out in the Consolidated Statement of Changes in Equity on page 182.
Capital redemption reserve
The capital redemption reserve was created to maintain the capital of the Company following the redemption
of the B-Shares associated with the Scheme of Arrangement created in 2004 which completed on
10 September 2009 with the re-designation of the unissued B-Shares as ordinary shares.
During the year, 6,279 thousand (2025: 3,321 thousand) shares were repurchased to the value of £233.0 million
(2025: £129.7 million). These shares were subsequently cancelled (2025: 3,321 thousand) as shown in Note 2.19.
On cancellation of the share capital, the capital redemption reserve was credited with the nominal value
of shares.
212 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
2 Results for the year continued
2.20 Reserves continued
Other reserve
The other reserve of negative £961.3 million (2025: negative £961.3 million) arose from the application of
merger accounting principles to the financial statements on implementation of the capital reorganisation of the
Group, incorporating a Scheme of Arrangement, in the year ended 30 April 2005.
Retained earnings
On 11 September 2025, 200 thousand ordinary shares (2025: 170 thousand) were transferred out of treasury to
the Employee Benefit Trust. On 30 September 2025, 189 thousand ordinary shares were transferred from the
Employee Benefit Trust to Executive Directors to satisfy the exercise of options under the 2011 LTIP (2025: 178
thousand ordinary shares).
2.21 Dividends per share
Dividend distributions to shareholders are recognised as a liability in the period in which the dividends are
appropriately authorised and approved for payout and are no longer at the discretion of the Company.
Unpaid dividends that do not meet these criteria are disclosed in the notes to the financial statements.
2026
2025
Dividend per Dividend per
share pence
£m
share pence
£m
Amounts recognised as distributions to equity
shareholders during the year:
June 2024
–
–
33 .0 0
35.0
September 2024 (special dividend)
–
–
174.00
183.8
March 2025
–
–
33.00
33.0
Total dividends
–
251.8
2.22 Contingent liabilities
The Group makes provisions for management’s best estimate of post-completion development obligations,
including the cost of remediation associated with building fire-safety matters, and all known material legal and
other claims, including from buildings or companies no longer owned by the Group in the ordinary course of
business. It is possible that the eventual costs may differ from management’s current best estimates.
Certain companies within the Group have given performance and other trade guarantees on behalf of other
members of the Group in the ordinary course of business. The Group has performance agreements in the ordinary
course of business of £23.6 million which are guaranteed by third parties (2025: £23.9 million). The Group
considers that the likelihood of an outflow of cash under these agreements is low and that no provision is required.
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
213 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
2.23 Notes to the Consolidated Cash Flow Statement
Reconciliation of profit after taxation for the year to cash generated from operations:
2026 2025
£m £m
Profit for the financial year
318.3
382.0
Adjustments for:
•
Taxation
133.1
146.9
•
Depreciation
3.3
3.8
•
(Profit) /loss on sale of property, plant and equipment
(9.8)
0.1
•
Finance income
(40.8)
(55.8)
•
Finance costs
39.2
41.6
•
Share of results of joint ventures after tax
(3.0)
(14.7)
•
Non-cash charge in respect of share awards
(2.0)
(2.6)
Changes in working capital:
Decrease in inventories
221.8
87.9
(Increase)/decrease in trade and other receivables
(33.0)
29.4
Decrease in trade and other payables
(283.8)
(332.8)
Cash generated from operations
343.3
285.8
Reconciliation of net cash flow to net cash:
Net increase/(decrease) in cash and cash equivalents, including bank overdraft
8.1
(176.8)
Movement in borrowings
17.9
(17.9)
Movement in net cash in the financial year
26.0
(194.7)
Opening net cash
337.3
532.0
Closing net cash
363.3
337. 3
Net cash as at 30 April:
Cash and cash equivalents
1,023.3
1,015.2
Non-current borrowings
(660.0)
(677.9)
Total borrowings
(660.0)
(677.9)
Net cash*
363.3
337.3
* IFRS 16 lease liabilities are detailed in Note 2.11.
2.24 Capital management, financial instruments and financial risk management
The Group finances its operations by a combination of shareholders’ funds, working capital and, where appropriate,
borrowings. The Group’s objective when managing capital is to maintain an appropriate capital structure in the
business to allow management to focus on creating sustainable long-term value for its shareholders.
The Group monitors capital levels principally by monitoring net cash/debt levels, cash flow forecasts and return
on average capital employed. The Group considers capital employed to be net assets adjusted for net cash/debt.
Capital employed at 30 April 2026 was £3,276.9 million (2025: £3,222.5 million). The increase in capital employed
in the year of £54.4 million reflects an increase in net cash during the year (2025: reduction of £194.0 million).
The Group’s financial instruments comprise financial assets being trade receivables, loans to joint ventures and
cash and cash equivalents; and financial liabilities being borrowings, trade payables excluding other taxes and
social security, lease liabilities and accruals other than those accounted for under IAS 19 ‘Employee Benefits’.
Cash and cash equivalents and borrowings are the principal financial instruments used to finance the business.
The other financial instruments arise in the ordinary course of business.
As the Group’s activities are predominantly conducted in sterling there is negligible direct currency risk.
Therefore, the Group’s key financial risks are primarily:
— liquidity risk – the risk that suitable funding for the Group’s activities may not be available;
— market interest rate risk – the risk that Group financing activities represented by floating borrowings are
adversely affected by fluctuation in market interest rates; and
— credit risk – the risk that a counterparty will default on its contractual obligations resulting in a loss to the Group.
214 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
2 Results for the year continued
2.24 Capital management, financial instruments and financial risk management continued
Financial instruments: financial assets
The Group’s financial assets can be summarised as follows:
2026 2025
£m £m
Current:
Trade receivables
67.8
47. 2
Loans to joint ventures
57.3
55.5
Cash and cash equivalents
1,023.3
1,015.2
Total financial assets
1,148.4
1,117.9
Trade receivables are non-interest bearing. Of the current trade receivables balance of £67.8 million (2025:
£47.2 million) none of the balance was overdue by more than 30 days (2025: £nil).
Cash and cash equivalents are short-term deposits held at either floating rates linked to the Bank of England
base rate or fixed money market rates. There are currently no Group assets that are measured at fair value.
Financial instruments: financial liabilities
The Group’s financial liabilities can be summarised as follows:
2026 2025
£m £m
Current
Trade payables
(751.6)
(838.1)
Lease liabilities
(2.1)
(2.0)
Accruals
(99.7)
(105.7)
(853.4)
(945.8)
Non-current
Trade payables
(372.3)
(462. 8)
Lease liabilities
(1.9)
(2.3)
Borrowings
(660.0)
(677.9)
(1,034.2)
(1,143.0)
Total trade and other payables
(1,887.6)
(2,088.8)
All amounts included above are unsecured, except for borrowings under the Group’s bank facilities as set out
later in this note.
Trade payables and other current liabilities are non-interest bearing.
The maturity profile of the Group’s non-current financial liabilities, all of which are held at amortised cost,
is as follows:
2026 2025
£m £m
Amounts due:
In more than one year but not more than two years
(64.6)
(97.5)
In more than two years but not more than five years
(548.1)
(525.8)
In more than five years
(421.5)
(519.7)
(1,034.2)
(1,143.0)
Current trade receivables and current trade and other payables approximate to their fair value as the transactions
which give rise to these balances arise in the normal course of trade and, where relevant, with industry standard
payment terms and have a short period to maturity (less than one year).
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
215 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Non-current trade payables comprise long-term land payables, which are held at their discounted present value
(calculated by discounting expected future cash flows at prevailing interest rates and yields as appropriate),
and borrowings. The discount rate applied reflects the Group’s credit risk, which is considered to be aligned to
a nominal, low risk pre-tax rate, on initial recognition of the financial liability, applied to the maturity profile of
the individual land creditors within the total. Non-current bank loans approximate to fair value as they are held
at variable market interest rates. The fair value of the £400 million unsecured 10-year Green Bonds at 30 April
2026 was determined by the ask price of £84.23 per £100 (2025: £81.80 per £100).
Liquidity risk
This is the risk that suitable funding for the Group’s activities may not be available. Group management
addresses this risk through review of rolling cash flow forecasts throughout the year to assess and monitor
the current and forecast availability of funding, and to ensure sufficient headroom against facility limits and
compliance with banking covenants. The committed borrowing facilities are set out below.
The contractual undiscounted maturity profile of the Group’s financial liabilities, which are included at their
carrying value in the preceding tables, is as follows:
2026 2025
£m £m
Amounts due:
In less than one year
(854.3)
(947.8)
In more than one year but not more than two years
(66.7)
(99.3)
In more than two years but not more than five years
(564.8)
(543.2)
In more than five years
(421.6)
(526.7)
(1,907.4)
(2,117.0)
Deposits and on account contract receipts are not included in the table above as they represent deferred
income and therefore do not have a payment maturity date.
Market interest rate risk
The Group’s cash and cash equivalents, bank and Homes England loans expose the Group to cash flow interest
rate risk.
The Group’s rolling cash flow forecasts incorporate appropriate interest assumptions, and management
carefully assesses expected activity levels and associated funding requirements in the prevailing and forecast
interest rate environment to ensure that this risk is managed.
If interest rates on the Group’s cash and cash equivalents and bank loans had been 50 basis points higher
throughout the year ended 30 April 2026, profit after tax for the year would have been £1.2 million higher
(2025: £1.6 million). This calculation is based on the monthly closing net cash/debt balance throughout the year.
A 50 basis point increase in interest rate represents management’s assessment of a reasonably possible change
for the year ended 30 April 2026.
Credit risk
The Group’s exposure to credit risk encompasses these financial assets: trade receivables, loans to joint
ventures and cash and cash equivalents. The Group has assessed expected credit losses and the loss allowance
for trade and other receivables and loans to joint ventures as immaterial.
There has been no impairment of trade receivables during the year (2025: £nil), nor are there any material provisions
held against trade receivables (2025: £nil), and £nil trade receivables are past their due date (2025: £nil).
The credit risk on cash and cash equivalents is limited because counterparties are leading international banks
with long-term A credit ratings assigned by international credit agencies.
216 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
2 Results for the year continued
2.24 Capital management, financial instruments and financial risk management continued
Borrowings
Borrowings are recognised initially at fair value, net of transaction costs incurred. Any difference between
the proceeds (net of transaction costs) and the redemption value is recognised in the Income Statement
over the period of the borrowings using the effective interest method.
The Group has committed corporate borrowing facilities as follows:
2026
2025
Drawn/ Drawn/
Available issued Undrawn Available Available issued Undrawn Available
£m £m £m £m £m £m £m £m
Bank facilities
Green Term Loan
260
(260)
–
Feb-29
260
(260)
–
Feb-29
Revolving Credit
Facility
540
–
540
Feb-29
540
–
540
Feb-29
Listed debt
Green Bonds
400
(400)
–
Aug-31
400
(400)
–
Aug-31
1,200
(660)
540
1,200
(660)
540
The £400 million unsecured 10-year Green Bonds mature in August 2031 at a fixed coupon of 2.5% per annum
and are listed on the International Securities Market of the London Stock Exchange plc. The Group is in
compliance with all of the financial covenants associated with the bonds.
The £800 million banking facilities comprise a £260 million Green Term Loan, which was initially drawn in March
2022 and bears interest at a rate linked to SONIA, and a £540 million Revolving Credit Facility (RCF) which
remains undrawn. The bank facilities are secured by debentures provided by certain Group holding companies
over their assets. The Group’s £800 million banking facilities are in place to February 2029.
The Group’s bank facilities contain the usual financials covenants, including minimum interest cover, asset cover
and maximum gearing, which are reported bi-annually in line with the Group’s accounting dates. The Group is in
compliance with all the financial covenants associated with the bank facilities and expects to continue to do so.
At 30 April 2026, the total drawn balance of these combined borrowing facilities was £660.0 million (2025:
£660.0 million). At 30 April 2026 there were £nil bank bonds in issue (2025: £nil) which are capable of being
issued under ancillary facilities available as part of the Group’s RCF.
In the year the unsecured £125.6 million facility the Group held with Homes England, whereby it may apply
amounts borrowed towards financing or re-financing certain infrastructure type costs incurred on three of its
developments, was reduced to £17.9 million, all of which was drawn. As at 30 April 2026 the £17.9 million has
been repaid in full.
Post 30 April 2026, the Group extended the banking facility to £1,000 million. Refer to Note 2.27, Events after
the reporting period.
2.25 Alternative performance measures
Berkeley uses a number of alternative performance measures (‘APMs’) which are not defined by IFRS.
The Directors consider these measures useful to assess the underlying performance of the Group alongside
the relevant IFRS financial information. They are referred to as Financial KPIs throughout the year end results.
The information below provides a definition of APMs and reconciliation to the relevant IFRS information,
where required:
Net cash
Net cash is defined as cash and cash equivalents, less total borrowings. This is reconciled in Note 2.23.
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
217 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Net asset value per share attributable to shareholders (NAVPS)
This is defined as net assets attributable to shareholders divided by the number of shares in issue, excluding
shares held in treasury and shares held by the Employee Benefit Trust.
2026
2025
Net assets (£m)
3,640.2
3,559.8
Total shares in issue (million)
101.1
107.4
Less:
Treasury shares held (million)
(8.1)
(8.3)
Employee Benefit Trust shares held (million)
(0.1)
(0.1)
Net shares used to determine NAVPS (million)
92.9
99.0
Net asset value per share attributable to shareholders (pence)
3,917
3,595
Return on capital employed (ROCE)
This measures the profitability and efficiency of capital being used by the Group and is calculated as profit
before interest and taxation (including joint venture profit before tax) divided by the average net assets
adjusted for debt/(cash).
2026 2025
£m £m
Operating profit
446.8
500.0
Share of joint ventures using equity method
3.0
14.7
Profit used to determine ROCE
449.8
514.7
Opening capital employed:
Net assets
3,559.8
3,560.5
Net cash
(337.3)
(532.0)
Opening capital employed
3,222.5
3,028.5
Closing capital employed:
Net assets
3,640.2
3,559.8
Net cash
(363.3)
(337. 3)
Closing capital employed
3,276.9
3,222.5
Average capital employed
3,249.7
3,125.5
Return on capital employed (%)
13.8%
16.5%
Core return on capital employed (Core ROCE)
This measures the profitability and efficiency of capital being used by the Group’s core business excluding Build
to Rent profit and assets, and is calculated as core profit before interest and taxation (including joint venture
profit before tax) divided by the average net assets excluding investment property (the average investment
property value for the period was £221.5 million), adjusted for debt/(cash).
Core ROCE for the year ended 30 April 2026 is 14.9% (30 April 2025: 16.9%).
Return on equity (ROE) before tax
This measures the efficiency of returns generated from shareholder equity before taxation and is calculated
as profit before taxation attributable to shareholders as a percentage of the average of opening and closing
shareholders’ funds.
218 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
2 Results for the year continued
2.25 Alternative performance measures continued
2026 2025
£m £m
Opening shareholders’ equity
3,559.8
3,560.5
Closing shareholders’ equity
3,640.2
3,559.8
Average shareholders’ equity
3,600.0
3,560.2
Profit before tax
451.4
528.9
Return on equity before tax (%)
12.5%
14.9%
Cash due on forward sales
This measures cash still due from customers, allowing for a risk adjustment, at the relevant Balance Sheet date
under unconditional contracts for sale. It excludes forward sales of affordable housing, commercial properties
and institutional sales as well as forward sales within the Group’s joint ventures.
Future gross margin in land holdings
This represents management’s risk-adjusted assessment of the potential gross profit for each of the Group’s
sites, including the proportionate share of its joint ventures, taking account of a wide range of factors,
including: current sales and input prices; the economic and political backdrop; the planning and regulatory
regime; and other market factors; all of which could have a significant effect on the eventual outcome.
2.26 Related party transactions
The Group has entered into the following related party transactions:
Transactions with Directors
There were no transactions with Directors in the year or the comparative year.
Transactions with joint ventures
The Group holds 50% interests in three joint ventures that are accounted for using the equity method as detailed
in Note 2.12. The Group has provided long-term loan facilities to the joint ventures to fund ongoing capital and
operational requirements. As settlement of these loans is neither planned nor likely to occur in the foreseeable future,
they are considered, in substance an extension of the Group’s net investment in the joint ventures.
During the financial year, the joint ventures paid management fees and other recharges to the Group of £9.3
million (2025: £10.4 million). Other transactions in the year include the movements in loans of £1.8 million
(2025: £1.7 million) and the receipt of dividends of £45.1 million (2025: £nil).
The outstanding loan balances with joint ventures at 30 April 2026 total £57.3 million (30 April 2025: £55.5 million).
All the long-term loans held have no specific repayment terms.
2.27 Events after the reporting period
Since the reporting date, the following non-adjusting events have occurred:
Share buy-backs
During the closed period spanning from 30 April 2026 to 24 June 2026, the Company continues its share buy-
back programme announced on 30 April 2026. The Company purchased 686,543 shares, representing 0.7% of
the issued share capital, for an aggregate cash consideration of £23.2 million up to and including 19 June 2026.
The shares repurchased were cancelled, resulting in a reduction in distributable reserves and share capital. The
irrevocable consent continues until 24 June 2026 with shares expected to be purchased up to the close of 23
June 2026 which are expected to be cancelled after the signing date. Details of purchases since 19 June 2026
have been disclosed in an RNS issued at the date of this report.
The purchases were conducted during the closed period under an independent, irrevocable arrangement with
a third-party broker, complying with all necessary regulatory requirements and ensuring no breach of inside
information trading restrictions occurred.
Borrowings
After the year end, the Group extended the banking facility to £1.0 billion, comprising a £240 million Term Loan,
which is fully drawn bearing interest at a rate linked to SONIA, and a £760 million Revolving Credit Facility
(RCF) which remains undrawn. These banking facilities are in place to June 2031 with two one-year extensions
taking the facility to June 2033. The banking facilities are secured by debentures provided by certain Group
holding companies over their assets.
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
219 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
2.28 Subsidiaries and joint ventures
(a) Subsidiaries
In accordance with Section 409 of the Companies Act 2006, a full list of subsidiaries, partnerships, associates,
joint ventures and joint arrangements, the country of incorporation, the registered address and the effective
percentage of equity owned, as at 30 April 2026 is disclosed below. The Berkeley Group plc is the only direct
subsidiary of The Berkeley Group Holdings plc and is an intermediate holding company. All wholly owned and
partly owned subsidiaries are included in the consolidation and all associated undertakings are included in the
Group’s financial statements.
All of the companies listed below are incorporated in England and Wales and have their registered office
address at Berkeley House, 19 Portsmouth Road, Cobham, Surrey, KT11 1JG, unless otherwise stated, and the
principal activity is residential-led mixed use development and ancillary activities. All of the companies are
wholly owned by the Group and unless otherwise indicated, all of the companies have ordinary share capital.
Agents of Berkeley Commercial Developments Limited
Ely Business Park Limited
Agents of Berkeley Homes (Central London) Limited
Chelsea Bridge Wharf (Block A) Limited
Chelsea Bridge Wharf (C North) Limited
Chelsea Bridge Wharf (Block B) Limited
Chelsea Bridge Wharf (C South) Limited
Chelsea Bridge Wharf (Block P) Limited
Agents of Berkeley Homes (Hampshire) Limited
Berkeley Homes (South Western House No. 1) Limited
Agents of Berkeley Homes public limited company
Berkeley (Canalside) Limited
Berkeley Homes (Surrey) Limited
Berkeley Build Limited
Berkeley Homes (Thames Gateway) Limited
Berkeley Fifty-Five Limited
Berkeley Homes (Thames Valley) Limited
Berkeley Forty-Five Limited
(i)
Berkeley Homes (Three Valleys) Limited
Berkeley Forty-Four plc
Berkeley Homes (Urban Developments) Limited
Berkeley Gateway Limited
Berkeley Homes (Urban Living) Limited
Berkeley Homes (Barn Elms) Limited
Berkeley Homes (Urban Renaissance) Limited
Berkeley Homes (Capital) plc
Berkeley Homes (West London) Limited
Berkeley Homes (Central & West London) Berkeley Homes (West Thames) Limited
Public Limited Company
Berkeley Homes (Central London) Limited
Berkeley Homes (Western) Limited
Berkeley Homes (Chiltern) Limited
Berkeley Modular Limited
Berkeley Homes (East Anglia) Limited
Berkeley Ninety-One Limited
Berkeley Homes (East Kent) Limited
Berkeley Partnership Homes Limited
Berkeley Homes (East Thames) Limited
Berkeley Seven Limited
Berkeley Homes (Eastern Counties) Limited
Berkeley STE Limited
Berkeley Homes (Eastern) Limited
Berkeley SW Management Limited
Berkeley Homes (Festival Waterfront Company) Limited
Berkeley Urban Renaissance Limited
Berkeley Homes (Hampshire) Limited
Clare Homes Limited
Berkeley Homes (Home Counties) plc
Lisa Estates (St Albans) Limited
Berkeley Homes (North East London) Limited
PEL Investments Limited
Berkeley Homes (Oxford & Chiltern) Limited
St John Homes Limited
(viii)
Berkeley Homes (South East London) Limited
St Joseph Homes Limited
Berkeley Homes (South London) Limited
Stanmore Relocations Limited
Berkeley Homes (Southern) Limited
Tabard Square (Building C) Limited
220 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
2 Results for the year continued
2.28 Subsidiaries and joint ventures continued
(a) Subsidiaries continued
Agents of Berkeley Twenty Limited
Thirlstone Homes (Western) Limited
Thirlstone Homes Limited
Agents of St George Central London Limited
Castle Court Putney Wharf Limited
Imperial Wharf (Block J) Ltd
Imperial Wharf (Block C) Limited
Imperial Wharf (Riverside Tower) Residential Limited
Agents of St George plc
St George Central London Limited
St George North London Limited
St George City Limited
St George South and Central London Limited
St George Developments Limited
St George South London Ltd
(vii)
St George Kings Cross Limited
St George West London Ltd
(ii)
Agents of St George South London Ltd
Battersea Reach Estate Company Limited
Riverside West (Block D) Residential Limited
Kensington Westside No. 2 Limited
Riverside West Car Park Limited
Putney Wharf Estate Limited
St George Wharf (Block B) Limited
Riverside West (Block C) Commercial Limited
St George Wharf (Block C) Limited
Riverside West (Block C) Residential Limited
St. George Wharf (Block D) Commercial Limited
Riverside West (Block D) Commercial Limited
St George Wharf Car Park Limited
Agents of St John Homes Limited
Berkeley Sixty-Six Limited
Non-Agency Companies
(v)
Ancestral Homes Limited
Berkeley Festival Limited
Berkeley (Inner-City Partnerships) Limited
Berkeley Fifty Limited
Berkeley (SQP) Limited
Berkeley Fifty-Eight Limited
Berkeley (Virginia Water) Limited
Berkeley Fifty-Nine Limited
Berkeley Affordable Homes Limited
Berkeley Fifty-One Limited
Berkeley Asset MSA Limited
Berkeley Fifty-Seven Limited
Berkeley College Homes Limited
Berkeley Fifty-Two Limited
Berkeley Commercial Developments Limited
Berkeley First Limited
Berkeley Commercial Investments Limited
Berkeley Five Limited
Berkeley Commercial Limited
Berkeley Forty Limited
Berkeley Community Villages Limited
Berkeley Forty-Nine Limited
Berkeley Construction Limited
Berkeley Forty-Seven Limited
Berkeley Developments Limited
(i)
Berkeley Forty-Six Limited
Berkeley Eighteen Limited
Berkeley Forty-Three Limited
Berkeley Eighty-One Limited
Berkeley Forty-Two Limited
Berkeley Eighty-Three Limited
Berkeley Fourteen Limited
Berkeley Eighty-Two Limited
Berkeley Group Pension Trustees Limited
Berkeley Enterprises Limited
Berkeley Group Services Limited
Berkeley Festival Development Limited
Berkeley Group SIP Trustee Limited
Berkeley Festival Hotels Limited
Berkeley Guarantee One Limited†
Berkeley Festival Investments Limited
Berkeley Homes (Carmelite) Limited
221 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Non-Agency Companies
(v)
Berkeley Homes (Chertsey) Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Forty-Eight Limited
Berkeley Homes (City & East London) Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Forty-Five Limited
Berkeley Homes (City) Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Forty-Four Limited
Berkeley Homes (Dorset) Limited.
Berkeley One Hundred and Forty-Nine Limited
Berkeley Homes (East London) Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Forty-One Limited
Berkeley Homes (Essex) Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Forty-Seven Limited
Berkeley Homes (Fleet) Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Forty-Six Limited
Berkeley Homes (Greater London) Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Four Limited
Berkeley Homes (Hertfordshire & Cambridgeshire) Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Nine Limited
Berkeley Homes (Kent) Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Ninety Limited
Berkeley Homes (North Western) Limited
(i)
Berkeley One Hundred and Ninety-Eight Limited
Berkeley Homes (PCL) Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Ninety-Five Limited
Berkeley Homes (South) Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Ninety-Four Limited
Berkeley Homes (Southall) Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Ninety-Nine Limited
Berkeley Homes (Southern Counties) Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Ninety-Seven Limited
Berkeley Homes (Stanmore) Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Ninety-Six Limited
Berkeley Homes Group Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and One Limited
Berkeley Homes public limited company
(iii) (viii)
Berkeley One Hundred and Seven Limited
Berkeley Living (Foundry Yard) Limited
(ix)
Berkeley One Hundred and Seventeen Limited
Berkeley Living (Navigator Place) Limited
(x)
Berkeley One Hundred and Seventy-One Limited
Berkeley Living (Refinery Square) Limited
(xi)
Berkeley One Hundred and Six Limited
Berkeley Living (The Watermint) Limited
(xii)
Berkeley One Hundred and Sixteen Limited
Berkeley Living Limited
(xiii)
Berkeley One Hundred and Sixty-Five Limited
Berkeley London Residential Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Sixty-Four Limited
Berkeley Manhattan Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Sixty-Six Limited
Berkeley Ninety-Eight Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Sixty-Three Limited
Berkeley Ninety-Five Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Thirteen Limited
Berkeley Ninety-Nine Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Thirty Limited
Berkeley Ninety-Seven Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Thirty-Eight Limited
Berkeley Ninety-Six Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Thirty-Five Limited
Berkeley Number Four Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Thirty-Four Limited
Berkeley Number Six Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Thirty-Nine Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Eight Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Thirty-One Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Eighteen Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Thirty-Seven Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Eighty Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Thirty-Six Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Eighty-Eight Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Thirty-Three Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Eighty-Five Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Thirty-Two Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Eighty-Nine Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Three Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Eighty-One Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Twenty Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Eighty-Seven Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Twenty-Eight Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Eighty-Two Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Twenty-Five Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Fifteen Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Twenty-Four Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Fifty Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Twenty-Nine Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Fifty-One Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Twenty-One Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Fifty-Two Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Twenty-Seven Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Five Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Twenty-Six Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Forty Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Twenty-Three Limited
222 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Non-Agency Companies
(v)
Berkeley One Hundred and Twenty-Two Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Forty-Eight Limited
Berkeley One Hundred and Two Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Forty-Four Limited
Berkeley Portsmouth Harbour Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Forty-Nine Limited
Berkeley Portsmouth Waterfront Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Forty-Seven Limited
Berkeley Properties Limited
(i)
Berkeley Two Hundred and Forty-Six Limited
Berkeley Residential Limited
(i)
Berkeley Two Hundred and Forty-Two Limited
Berkeley Ryewood Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Fourteen Limited
Berkeley Seventy Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Nine Limited
Berkeley Seventy-Four Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Nineteen Limited
Berkeley Seventy-One plc
(vii)
Berkeley Two Hundred and One Limited
(i)
Berkeley Seventy-Seven Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Seven Limited
Berkeley Seventy-Six Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Seventeen Limited
Berkeley Seventy-Two Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Seventy Limited
Berkeley Sixty Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Seventy-Five Limited
Berkeley Sixty-Eight Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Seventy-Four Limited
Berkeley Sixty-Four Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Seventy-One Limited
Berkeley Sixty-Nine Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Seventy-Seven Limited
Berkeley Sixty-One Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Seventy-Six Limited
Berkeley Special Projects Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Seventy-Three Limited
Berkeley Strategic Land Limited
(vii)
Berkeley Two Hundred and Seventy-Two Limited
Berkeley Sustainable Communities Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Sixty Limited
Berkeley Thirty-Eight Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Sixty-Eight Limited
Berkeley Thirty-Nine Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Sixty-Four Limited
Berkeley Thirty-Three Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Sixty-Nine Limited
Berkeley Three Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Sixty-Three Limited
Berkeley Twenty Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Thirteen Limited
Berkeley Twenty-Eight Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Thirty Limited
Berkeley Twenty-Four Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Thirty-One Limited
Berkeley Twenty-Nine Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Thirty-Six Limited
Berkeley Twenty-Seven Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Thirty-Three Limited
Berkeley Twenty-Three Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Thirty-Two Limited
Berkeley Twenty-Two Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Three Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Eight Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Twelve Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Eighteen Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Twenty Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Fifty Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Two Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Fifty-Eight Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Fifty-Five Limited
Berkeley Ventures Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Fifty-Four Limited
BH (City Forum) Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Fifty-Nine Limited
Boardcable Limited
(viii)
Berkeley Two Hundred and Fifty-One Limited
Bromyard House (Car Park) Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Fifty-Seven Limited
Bromyard House (Freehold) Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Fifty-Six Limited
Bromyard House (North) Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Fifty-Three Limited
Bromyard House Limited
Berkeley Two Hundred and Fifty-Two Limited
BWW Management Limited
(viii)
Berkeley Two Hundred and Five Limited
Charco 143 Limited
(i)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
2 Results for the year continued
2.28 Subsidiaries and joint ventures continued
(a) Subsidiaries continued
223 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Non-Agency Companies
(v)
Chelsea Bridge Wharf (Management Company) Limited
St. George Properties Ltd.
Chelsea Bridge Wharf Car Park Limited
(viii)
St George Real Estate Limited
Community Housing Action Limited
St George Regeneration Limited
Community Villages Limited
St. George Southern Ltd
CPWGCO 1 Limited
St. George Western Ltd
Drummond Road (Number 1) Limited
St George Wharf Hotel Limited
Drummond Road (Number 2) Limited
St. George’s Hill Property Company Limited
Exchange Place No.2 Limited
St James Group Limited
Fishguard Bridge Limited
St James Homes (Grosvenor Dock) Limited
Fishguard Tunnel Limited
St James Homes Limited
(viii)
Great Woodcote Park Management Limited
St Katharine Homes Limited
Hertfordshire Homes Limited
St William Eight Limited
Historic Homes Limited
St William Eighteen Limited
Kentdean Limited
St William Eleven Limited
One Tower Bridge Limited
St William Fifteen Limited
Quod Erat Demonstrandum Properties Limited
St William Five Limited
Retirement Homes Limited
St William Four Limited
Royal Clarence Yard (Marina) Limited
St William Fourteen Limited
Royal Clarence Yard (Phase A) Limited
St William Holdings Limited
Royal Clarence Yard (Phase B) Limited
St William Homes LLP†
Royal Clarence Yard (Phase C) Limited
St William Nine Limited
Royal Clarence Yard (Phase E) Limited
St William Nineteen Limited
Royal Clarence Yard (Phase G) Management Company Limited
St William One Ltd
Royal Clarence Yard (Phase H) Limited
St William Seven Limited
Royal Clarence Yard (Phase I) Limited
St William Seventeen Limited
Royal Clarence Yard (Phase K) Management Company Limited
St William Six Limited
Royal Clarence Yard Estate Limited
St William Sixteen Limited
Sandgates Developments Limited
(i)
St William Ten Limited
Sitesecure Limited
St William Thirteen Limited
SJC (Highgate) Limited
(viii)
St William Three Limited
South Quay Plaza Management Limited (62.5%)
(vi)
St William Twelve Limited
St Edward Limited
St William Twenty Limited
St George (Crawford Street) Limited
St William Twenty-Eight Limited
St George (Queenstown Place) Limited
St William Twenty-Five Limited
St George Blackfriars Limited
St William Twenty-Four Limited
St George Commercial Limited
St William Twenty-One Limited
St George Ealing Limited
St William Twenty-Seven Limited
St. George Eastern Limited
St William Twenty-Six Limited
St. George Inner Cities Ltd.
St William Twenty-Three Limited
St. George Investments Ltd
St William Twenty-Two Limited
St. George London Ltd
St William Two Limited
St George Northfields Limited
Tabard Square (Building A) Limited
St. George Partnerships Ltd.
Tabard Square (Building B) Limited
St George plc
(iv)
Tabard Square (Car Park) Limited
St George Project Management Limited
TBG (3)
2009
Limited
The Berkeley Festival Waterfront Company Limited
Thirlstone (JLP) Limited
The Berkeley Group plc
Thirlstone Commercial Limited
224 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Non-Agency Companies
(v)
The Millennium Festival Leisure Company Limited
Thirlstone plc
(ii)
The Oxford Gateway Development Company Limited
Woodside Road Limited
The Tower, One St George Wharf Limited
(i)
(i) A ordinary and B ordinary shares
(ii) Ordinary and preference shares
(iii) Ordinary and deferred shares
(iv) Ordinary, deferred and preference shares
(v) List contains companies that are a principal to agency agreements but are not agents themselves
(vi) Registered office is 83 The Avenue, Sunbury-on-Thames, Middlesex, TW16 5HZ
(vii) Ordinary and redeemable preference shares
(viii) Registered office is 19 Portsmouth Road, Cobham, Surrey, KT11 1JG
(ix) Formerly known as Berkeley Two Hundred and Forty-Three Limited
(x) Formerly known as Berkeley Two Hundred and Thirty-Four Limited
(xi) Formerly known as Berkeley Two Hundred and Sixty-Six Limited
(xii) Formerly known as Berkeley Two Hundred and Forty-Five Limited
(xiii) Formerly known as Berkeley Two Hundred and Sixty-Seven Limited
† Partnership with no share capital
The subsidiary companies listed below are incorporated outside of England and Wales. Their country of
incorporation and registered offices are listed below. Their principal activities continue to be that of residential-
led mixed use development and ancillary activities. All of the companies are wholly owned by the Group and
unless otherwise indicated, all of the companies have ordinary share capital.
Country of
incorporation
Registered office
Aragon Investments Limited
Jersey
28 Esplanade, St. Helier, JE2 3QA, Jersey
Berkeley (Carnwath Road) Limited
Isle of Man
First Floor, Jubilee Buildings, Victoria Street, Douglas,
IM1 2SH, Isle of Man
Berkeley (Hong Kong) Limited
Hong Kong
3806
Central Plaza, 18 Harbour Road, Wanchai, Hong Kong
Berkeley Homes Special Contracts
Scotland
Saltire Court, 20 Castle Terrace, Edinburgh, EH1 2EN
Public Limited
(iii)
Berkeley Property Investments Limited
Jersey
28 Esplanade, St. Helier, JE2 3QA, Jersey
Berkeley Real Estate Consulting
China
Unit 1902,
floor 19, No.1, Guanghua Road, Chaoyang
(Beijing) Co. Limited* District, Beijing, China
Berkeley Residential (Singapore) Limited
Singapore
77 Robinson Road, #13-00 Robinson 77, Singapore 068896
Berkeley Whitehart Investments Limited
Jersey
28 Esplanade, St. Helier, JE2 3QA, Jersey
Real Star Investments Limited
(i)(ii)
Jersey
28 Esplanade, St. Helier, JE2 3QA, Jersey
Silverdale One Limited
(ii)
Jersey
28 Esplanade, St. Helier, JE2 3QA, Jersey
St George Battersea Reach Limited
Jersey
2 Hill Street, St. Helier, JE2 4UA, Jersey
(i) Agency company of St James Group Limited
(ii) Non-UK nominee company
(iii) Ordinary, A deferred and B deferred shares
* Accounting date of 31 December
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements
continued
2 Results for the year continued
2.28 Subsidiaries and joint ventures continued
(a) Subsidiaries continued
225 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(b) Joint ventures
At 30 April 2026, the Group had an interest in the following joint ventures which have been equity accounted
to 30 April and have an accounting date of 30 April unless otherwise indicated. All of the companies listed
below are incorporated in England and Wales and have their registered office address at Berkeley House, 19
Portsmouth Road, Cobham, Surrey, KT11 1JG, unless otherwise stated, and the principal activity is residential-led
mixed use development and ancillary activities. All of the companies are 50% owned by the Group and unless
otherwise indicated, all of the companies have ordinary share capital.
Berkeley Carlton Holdings Limited
(ii)
Berkeley Sutton Limited
(ii)
Berkeley Latimer Estates Limited
(ii) (v)***
Mayflower Residential Limited
(ii) (v)***
Segro V-Park Grand Union LLP
*†
SEH Manager Limited
SEH Nominee Limited
SES Manager Limited
(ii)
SES Nominee Limited
St Edward Homes Limited
(iii)
St Edward Homes Number Five Limited
**
St Edward Homes Number Four Limited
**
St Edward Homes Number One Limited
**
St Edward Homes Number Three Limited
**(v)
St Edward Homes Number Two Limited
**
St Edward Homes Partnership Freeholds Limited
St Edward Strand Partnership Freeholds Limited
St George Little Britain (No. 1) Limited
(ii)
St George Little Britain (No.2) Limited
(ii)
The St Edward Homes Partnership (unregistered partnership)
(i)
The St Edward (Strand) Partnership (unregistered partnership)
(i)
U B Developments Limited
(iv) (v)
(i) Partnership with no share capital
(ii) A ordinary and B ordinary shares
(iii) A ordinary, B ordinary, C preference and D preference shares
(iv) B ordinary shares
(v) Registered office is 19 Portsmouth Road, Cobham, Surrey, KT11 1JG
* Accounting date of 31 December
** 100% owned by St Edward Homes Limited
*** Accounting date of 31 March
† Registered office address is 1 New Burlington Place, London, United Kingdom, W1S 2HR
226 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Company Balance Sheet
As at 30 April Notes
2026
£m
2025
£m
Fixed assets
Investments
C2.4 1,446.9 1,445.8
Deferred tax asset C2.5 0.6 –
1,447.5 1,445.8
Current assets
Debtors: Amounts falling due within one year
C2.6 671.8 640.8
Cash at bank and in hand 0.9 0.9
672.7 641.7
Current liabilities
Creditors (amounts falling due within one year)
C2.7 (945.0) (907.7)
Net current liabilities (272.3) (266.0)
Total assets less current liabilities and net assets 1,175.2 1,179.8
Capital and reserves
Called-up share capital
C2.8 5.6 6.0
Share premium account C2.8 49.8 49.8
Capital redemption reserve 25.9 25.5
Profit and loss account 1,093.9 1,098.5
Total shareholders’ funds 1,175.2 1,179.8
As permitted by Section 408 of the Companies Act 2006, The Berkeley Group Holdings plc has not presented
its own Income Statement. The profit after taxation of the Company for the financial year was £231.0 million
(2025: £353.9 million).
The financial statements on pages 226 to 232 were approved by the Board of Directors on 23 June 2026 and
were signed on its behalf by:
N L Eady
Chief Financial Officer
Registered no: 5172586
227 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Company Statement of Changes in Equity
Called-up share
capital
£m
Share premium
account
£m
Capital
redemption
reserve
£m
Profit and loss
account
£m
Total
shareholders’
funds
£m
At 1 May 2025 6.0 49.8 25.5 1,098.5 1,179.8
Profit after taxation for the year – – – 231.0 231.0
Purchase of ordinary shares (0.4) – 0.4 (233.0) (233.0)
Charge in respect of employee
share schemes
– – – (2.4) (2.4)
Deferred tax in respect of employee
share schemes
– – – (0.2) (0.2)
At 30 April 2026 5.6 49.8 25.9 1,093.9 1,175.2
At 1 May 2024 6.2 49.8 25.3 1,125.1 1,206.4
Profit after taxation for the year – – – 353.9 353.9
Purchase of ordinary shares (0.2) – 0.2 (129.7) (129.7)
Credit in respect of employee
share schemes
– – – 0.1 0.1
Deferred tax in respect of employee
share schemes
– – – 0.9 0.9
Dividends to equity holders of the
Company
– – – (251.8) (251.8)
At 30 April 2025 6.0 49.8 25.5 1,098.5 1,179.8
228 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Notes to the Company Financial Statements
C1 Basis of preparation
C1.1 Introduction
The Company meets the definition of a qualifying entity under Financial Reporting Standard 101 (FRS 101)
issued by the Financial Reporting Council. Accordingly, these financial statements were prepared in accordance
with FRS 101 ‘Reduced Disclosure Framework’ as issued by the Financial Reporting Council. In preparing these
financial statements, the Company applies the recognition measurement and disclosure requirements of UK-
adopted international accounting standards, but makes amendments where necessary in order to comply with
the Companies Act 2006.
The accounting policies adopted for the Parent Company, The Berkeley Group Holdings plc, are otherwise
consistent with those used for the Group which are set out on pages 180 to 225.
In these financial statements, the Company has applied the exemptions available under FRS 101 in respect of
the following disclosures:
— Cash Flow Statement and related notes;
— disclosures in respect of transactions with wholly owned subsidiaries;
— disclosures in respect of capital management;
— the effects of new but not yet effective IFRSs;
— certain disclosures required by IFRS 13 ‘Fair Value Measurement’ and the disclosures required by IFRS 7
‘Financial Instrument Disclosures’; and
— disclosures in respect of the compensation of key management personnel.
The principal activity of The Berkeley Group Holdings plc (the Company) is to act as a holding company.
C1.2 Going concern
The Group’s business activities together with the factors likely to affect its future development performance
and position are set out in the Strategic Report. The financial position of the Group, its cash flows, liquidity
position and borrowing facilities are all described in the Trading and Financial Review on pages 31 to 33.
The Group has significant financial resources and the Directors have assessed the future funding requirements
of the Group, including the return of £0.9 billion to shareholders set out to September 2030, and compared this
with the level of committed loan facilities and cash resources over the medium term. In making this assessment,
consideration has been given to the uncertainty inherent in future financial forecasts and, where applicable,
reasonable sensitivities have been applied to the key factors affecting the financial performance of the Group.
Based on the financial performance of the Group, the Directors have a reasonable expectation that the
Company has adequate resources to continue its operational existence for at least 12 months from the date of
signing the accounts, notwithstanding its net current liability position of £272.3 million (2025: £266.0 million).
For this reason they continue to adopt the going concern basis of accounting in preparing the annual financial
statements.
C2 Notes to the Company accounts
C2.1 Profit before taxation
Expenditure is recognised in respect of goods and services received when supplied in accordance with
contractual terms. Provision is made when an obligation exists for a future liability in respect of a past event
and where the amount of the obligation can be reliably estimated.
Profit before taxation is stated after charging the following amounts:
2026
£m
2025
£m
Auditor’s remuneration 0.1 0.1
There were no non-audit services provided by the Company’s current auditor during the year (2025: £nil).
229 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
C2.2 Directors and employees
The Company operates three equity settled, share based compensation plans (2025: three). The fair value of the
employee services received in exchange for the grant of the options is recognised as an expense. The total amount
to be expensed over the vesting period is determined by reference to the fair value of the options granted.
At each Balance Sheet date, the Company revises its estimates of the number of options that are expected to
vest. It recognises the impact of the revision to original estimates, if any, in the profit and loss account, with a
corresponding adjustment to equity. Amounts recognised in respect of Executive Directors of the Company’s
subsidiaries are recognised as an addition to the cost of the investment.
The proceeds received net of any directly attributable transaction costs are credited to share capital (nominal
value) and share premium when the options are exercised.
The Company has one cash settled share based compensation plan (2025: nil). The cost of cash settled
transactions is recognised as an expense over the vesting period measured by reference to the fair value of the
corresponding liability which is recognised on the Balance Sheet. The liability is remeasured at fair value at each
Balance Sheet date until settlement with changes in fair value recognised in the Profit and Loss Account.
Pension contributions under defined contribution schemes are charged to the Profit and Loss Account as they fall due.
2026
£m
2025
£m
Staff costs:
Wages and salaries
4.0 2.1
Social security costs 0.7 0.5
Share based payments – equity settled 1.1 2.1
Share based payments – cash settled 0.7 –
6.5 4.7
The average monthly number of persons employed by the Company during the year was 10, all of whom are
Directors (2025: nine).
Directors
Details of Directors’ emoluments are set out in the Remuneration Report on pages 128 to 153.
Pensions
During the year, the Company participated in one of the Group’s pension schemes, The Berkeley Group plc
Group Personal Pension Plan. Further details on this scheme are set out in Note 2.5 to the Consolidated
Financial Statements. Contributions amounting to £nil (2025: £nil) were paid into the defined contribution
scheme during the year.
Share based payments
The charge/credit to the Profit and Loss Account in respect of equity settled share based payments in the
year are:
— 2011 LTIP charge of £0.1 million (2025: £0.1 million)
— 2022 LTOP charge of £1.3 million (2025: £1.2 million)
— RSP credit of £0.3 million (2025: charge of £0.8 million)
The charge to the reserves during the year in respect of employee share schemes was £2.4 million (2025: £0.1
million credit) which includes the corresponding entry to the cost of investment of £1.1 million (2025: £2.7
million) detailed in Note C2.4. The offsetting entry within reserves results from the non-cash IFRS 2 charge for
the year.
The charge to the Profit and Loss Account in respect of cash settled share based payments in the year is
£0.7 million (2025: £nil) in relation to the PSP. As at 30 April 2026, the total carrying amount of the liability
based on the closing share price is £0.7 million (2025: £nil), recorded in accruals. See Note C2.7.
Further information on the Company’s share incentive schemes is included in the Remuneration Report on
pages 128 to 153 as well as Note 2.5 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
230 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
C2 Notes to the Company accounts continued
C2.3 The Berkeley Group Holdings plc profit and loss account
The profit for the year in the Company is £231.0 million (2025: £353.9 million).
C2.4 Investments
Investments in subsidiary undertakings are included in the Balance Sheet at cost less provision for any impairment.
2026
£m
2025
£m
Investments at cost:
Investments in shares of subsidiary undertaking at 1 May
1,445.8 1,443.1
Additions 1.1 2.7
Investments in shares of subsidiary undertaking at 30 April 1,446.9 1,445.8
Additions in the year relate to Company contributions to The Berkeley Group plc for employee services to be
settled through the issue of shares on the vesting of the Berkeley Group Holdings plc 2011 LTIP awards, 2022
LTOP awards and RSP awards for the benefit of employees of its subsidiaries.
The Directors believe that the carrying value of the investments is supported by their underlying net assets.
Details of subsidiaries are given within Note 2.28 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
C2.5 Deferred tax asset
Deferred tax is recognised in respect of all timing differences that have originated but not reversed at the
Balance Sheet date, where transactions or events that result in an obligation to pay more tax in the future
or a right to pay less tax in the future have occurred at the Balance Sheet date.
A net deferred tax asset is recognised 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
against which to recover carried forward tax losses and from which the future reversal of underlying timing
differences can be deducted.
Deferred tax is measured at the average tax rates that are expected to apply in the periods in which
the timing differences are expected to reverse, based on tax rates and laws that have been enacted or
substantively enacted by the Balance Sheet date. Deferred tax is measured on an undiscounted basis.
2026
£m
2025
£m
Non-current
Deferred tax asset
0.6 –
Current
Deferred tax asset
– 4.2
In the prior year, the deferred tax asset was presented within Debtors (amounts falling due within one year) on
the Balance Sheet.
The movements on the deferred tax asset are as follows:
2026
£m
2025
£m
At 1 May 4.2 5.6
Deferred tax in respect of employee share schemes (3.6) (1.4)
At 30 April 0.6 4.2
Deferred tax is calculated in full on temporary differences at the tax rates that are expected to apply for the
period when the asset is realised and the liability is settled using a tax rate of 25% (2025: 25%). Accordingly, all
temporary differences have been calculated. There is no unprovided deferred tax (2025: £nil) at the Balance
Sheet date.
The deferred tax asset of £0.6 million relates to short-term timing differences (2025: £4.2 million).
Notes to the Company Financial Statements
continued
231 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
C2.6 Debtors: Amounts falling due within one year
2026
£m
2025
£m
Amounts owed by subsidiary undertakings 671.8 636.6
All amounts owed from subsidiary undertakings are unsecured, bear interest at rates linked to the Bank of
England base rate and have no fixed repayment date. The Company has assessed expected credit losses
as immaterial on amounts owed from subsidiary undertakings. In the current year, the deferred tax asset is
presented within note C2.5 Deferred tax assets for the current and prior years.
C2.7 Creditors: Amounts falling due within one year
Creditors are recognised initially at fair value. Subsequent to initial recognition they are measured at
amortised cost using the effective interest method.
2026
£m
2025
£m
Current
Amounts owed to subsidiary undertakings
(942.2) (906.1)
Other taxation and social security (0.5) (1.6)
Accruals (2.3) –
(945.0) (907.7)
All amounts included above are unsecured. The interest rate on the whole amount (2025: the whole amount)
owed to subsidiary undertakings is 4.0% (2025: 4.0%), with no fixed repayment date.
C2.8 Called-up share capital
The movements on allotted and fully paid share capital for the Company in the year were as follows:
Ordinary shares Share capital Share premium
2026
No ’000
2025
No ’000
2026
£m
2025
£m
2026
£m
2025
£m
Issued
At start of year 107,372 114,712 6.0 6.2 49.8 49.8
Shares cancelled (6,279) (3,321) (0.4) (0.2) – –
Share consolidation – (4,019) – – – –
At end of year 101,093 107,372 5.6 6.0 49.8 49.8
On 9 September 2024, a share consolidation was undertaken which reduced the Company’s ordinary share
capital, net of treasury and EBT shares, by 3.51%. The share consolidation replaced the total number of existing
ordinary shares of 114.5 million, with a nominal value of 5.4141 pence each, into a reduced number of new
ordinary shares of 110.5 million, each at a nominal value of 5.6110 pence at the time of the consolidation.
Each ordinary share of 5.6110 pence is a voting share in the capital of the Company, is entitled to participate in
the profits of the Company and on the winding up is entitled to participate in the assets of the Company.
During the 2026 financial year, 6,279 thousand shares were repurchased (2025: 3,321 thousand) for a
total consideration of £233.0 million, excluding transaction costs (2025: £129.7 million). These shares were
subsequently cancelled.
On 11 September 2025, 200 thousand ordinary shares (2025: 170 thousand) were transferred out of treasury to
the Employee Benefit Trust.
On 30 September 2025, 189 thousand ordinary shares (2025: 178 thousand) were transferred from the
Employee Benefit Trust to Executive Directors to satisfy the exercise of options under the 2011 LTIP.
At 30 April 2026, there were 57 thousand shares held in trust (2025: 46 thousand) by the Employee Benefit
Trust. The market value of these shares at 30 April 2026 was £1.8 million (2025: £1.9 million).
232 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
C2 Notes to the Company accounts continued
C2.8 Called-up share capital continued
At 30 April 2026, there were 8,106 thousand (2025: 8,306 thousand) treasury shares held by the Group.
The market value of the shares at 30 April 2026 was £259.9 million (2025: £346.4 million).
The movements in the year are disclosed in Notes 2.19 and 2.20 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
C2.9 Dividends per share
Dividend distributions to shareholders are recognised as a liability in the period in which the dividends are
appropriately authorised and approved for payout and are no longer at the discretion of the Company.
Unpaid dividends that do not meet these criteria are disclosed in the notes to the financial statements.
2026 2025
Dividend per
share pence £m
Dividend per
share pence £m
Amounts recognised as distributions to
equity shareholders during the year:
June 2024
– – 33.00 35.0
September 2024 (special dividend) – – 174.00 183.8
March 2025 – – 33.00 33.0
Total dividends – – 251.8
C2.10 Related party transactions
The Company has not undertaken related party transactions during the year with entities that are not wholly
owned subsidiaries of The Berkeley Group Holdings plc. Transactions with wholly owned members of The
Berkeley Group Holdings plc are exempt under FRS 101 with reduced disclosure.
C2.11 Events after the reporting period
Since the reporting date, the following non-adjusting event has occurred:
Share buy-backs
During the closed period spanning from 30 April 2026 to 24 June 2026, the Company continues its share buy-
back programme announced on 30 April 2026. The Company purchased 686,543 shares, representing 0.7% of
the issued share capital, for an aggregate cash consideration of £23.2 million up to and including 19 June 2026.
The shares repurchased were cancelled, resulting in a reduction in distributable reserves and share capital. The
irrevocable consent continues until 24 June 2026 with shares expected to be purchased up to the close of 23
June 2026 which are expected to be cancelled after the signing date. Details of purchases since 19 June 2026
have been disclosed in an RNS issued at the date of this report.
The purchases were conducted during the closed period under an independent, irrevocable arrangement with
a third-party broker, complying with all necessary regulatory requirements and ensuring no breach of inside
information trading restrictions occurred. The total shares repurchased were cancelled, resulting in a reduction
in distributable reserves and share capital.
Notes to the Company Financial Statements
continued
233 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
02–93 | STRATEGIC REPORT 94–161 | CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 162–234 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Five Year Summary
2026
£m
2025
£m
2024
£m
2023
£m
2022
£m
Income statement
Revenue
2,383.3 2,486.5 2,464.3 2,550.2 2,348.0
Operating profit 446.8 500.0 479.7 518.3 507.9
Share of results of joint ventures 3.0 14.7 65.6 96.3 56.1
Net finance income/(costs) 1.6 14.2 12.0 (10.6) (12.5)
Profit before taxation 451.4 528.9 557. 3 604.0 551.5
Basic earnings per share 331.6 371.8 373.9 426.8p 417.8p
Statement of financial position
Capital employed
3,276.9 3,222.5 3,028.5 2,921.9 2,867. 2
Net cash 363.3 337.3 532.0 410.4 268.9
Net assets 3,640.2 3,559.8 3,560.5 3,332.3 3,136.1
Net assets per share attributable
to shareholders
1
3,917p 3,595p 3,363p 3,101p 2,818p
Ratios and statistics
Return on capital employed
2
13.8% 16.5% 18.3% 21.2% 23.0%
Core return on capital employed 14.9% 16.9% 18.3% 21.2% 23.0%
Return on equity after tax
4
8.8% 10.7% 11.5% 14.4% 15.3%
Return on equity before tax
5
12.5% 14.9% 16.2% 18.7% 17.5%
Homes sold
6
4,076 4,047 3,521 4,043 3,760
Cash due on forward sales
7
1,006 1,403 1,701 2,136 2,171
Gross margin on land holdings
8
6,442 6,722 6,929 7,629 8,258
1 Net assets attributable to shareholders divided by the number of shares in issue excluding shares held in treasury and shares held by
the Employee Benefit Trust.
2 This measures the profitability and efficiency of capital being used by the Group and is calculated as profit before interest and taxation
(including joint venture profit before tax) divided by the average net assets adjusted for debt/(cash).
3 This measures the profitability and efficiency of capital being used by the Group’s core business excluding Build to Rent profit and
assets, and is calculated as core profit before interest and taxation (including joint venture profit before tax) divided by the average net
assets excluding investment property adjusted for debt/(cash).
4 This measures the efficiency of returns generated from shareholder equity after taxation and is calculated as profit after taxation
attributable to shareholders as a percentage of the average of opening and closing shareholders’ funds.
5 Calculated as profit before taxation attributable to shareholders as a percentage of the average of opening and closing shareholders’
funds.
6 The number of homes legally completed and recorded in revenue in the year excluding joint ventures.
7 Cash still due from customers under unconditional contracts for sale.
8 The measure of expected value in the Group’s land holdings in the event the Group successfully sells and delivers the developments
planned for.
See Note 2.25 Alternative Performance Measure for full definitions where relevant.
234 | BERKELEY GROUP 2026 ANNUAL REPORT
Financial diary
Annual General Meeting and Trading Update 11 September 2026
Half year end 31 October 2026
Interim Results Announcement for the six months ending 31 October 2026 9 December 2026
Trading Update March 2027
Year end 30 April 2027
Announcement of Results for the year ending 30 April 2027 June 2027
Publication of 2027 Annual Report August 2027
Registered office and advisors
Registered office and principal place
ofbusiness
The Berkeley Group Holdings plc
Berkeley House
19 Portsmouth Road
Cobham
Surrey KT11 1JG
Registered number: 5172586
Registrars
MUFG Corporate Markets
10th Floor
Central Square
29 Wellington Street
Leeds LS1 4DL
0871 664 0300 (from the UK)
+44 (0) 371 664 0300 (from overseas)
shareholderenquiries@cm.mpms.mufg.com
Corporate brokers and financial advisors
Barclays Bank plc
J.P. Morgan Cazenove
Share price information
The Company’s share capital is listed on the London
Stock Exchange. The latest share price is available via
the Company’s website at www.berkeleygroup.co.uk
Solicitor
Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP
Bankers
Barclays Bank plc
HSBC Bank plc
Lloyds Bank plc
Banco Santander, S.A., London Branch
National Westminster Bank plc
Handelsbanken plc
Auditor
KPMG LLP
CBP031435
Printed by a CarbonNeutral® Company certified to ISO 14001 environmental
managementsystem.
Printed on material from well-managed, FSC® certified forests and other
controlledsources.
100% of the inks used are vegetable oil based, 95% of press chemicals are
recycled for further use and, on average 99% of any waste associated with this
production will be recycled and the remaining 1% used to generate energy.
The paper is Carbon Balanced with World Land Trust, an international
conservation charity, who offset carbon emissions through the purchase and
preservation of high conservation value land. Through protecting standing forests
under threat of clearance, carbon is locked-in that would otherwise be released.
The Berkeley Group Holdings plc
Berkeley House
19 Portsmouth Road
Cobham
Surrey KT11 1JG
www.berkeleygroup.co.uk
Registered number: 5172586