This is an area where we hope that forthcoming guidance on modifications will assist. Our view is as follows.
Under Regulations 72(1)(b) and (c) PCR 2015, the 50% ‘cap’ applies to each modification. See Regulation 72(2) PCR 2015, which states that the following wording used in those two exemptions - “provided that any increase in price does not exceed 50% of the value of the original contract” - applies to the value of “each modification” where several successful modifications are made. There is a provision at Regulation 72(2)(b) which does prohibit successive modifications where they are aimed at circumventing the rules.
The drafting in the Act arrives at the same position via a different route. Section 74(1) states (inter alia) that a modification can be made if it is a permitted modification under Schedule 8. Each modification is assessed against the schedule 8 “grounds” on a standalone basis, not cumulatively. The only exception is set out at section 74(7) and (8), which prevents modifications being “separated out” when reasonably they should be treated as one modification; if this is the case, then the modifications need to be taken together in the round and section 74(1) then applied, to test whether the modifications may be made.
(For completeness, although not directly relevant to the question, we note that both the PCR 2015 and the Act do require authorities to aggregate the value of modifications made in relation to Regulation 72(1)(f) PCR 2015 and their broad equivalent – “below-threshold modifications” – under section 74(4) of the Act).