[2007] LRA 82 2006, 2 May 2007. Considered whether the price paid for a leasehold enfranchisement should reflect the premium to be paid as a special purchaser for the merger of two leasehold interests. The appellants (W) were freeholders in two mews properties. The price paid for the second had included a sum to reflect the diminution of value due to loss of opportunity to dispose of the two properties together. W contracted to sell the remainder of the lease and the right to acquire freehold under the Act. In an enfranchisement claim by the respondent (R), W contended for a sum to reflect the premium they would pay for the merger of freehold interests. The leasehold valuation tribunal ruled that W had already been compensated for any loss on enfranchisement. W appealed against this decision. "Held": Valuations under the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 s9(1A) did not make presumption that the seller had knowledge of any purchaser?s special interest. At the valuation date W had not known of R's offer for the lease, so no special purchaser?s premium was payable. Appeal dismissed.