The English version of these terms is always the legally binding version — if you read a translation and it says something different from the English version, the English version wins.
New provision establishes English text supremacy in disputes, potentially disadvantaging non-English-speaking users relying on translated versions of terms.
View full change record →If you read Revolut's terms in a language other than English and there is any difference between the translation and the English original, the English version is what legally applies — meaning translated terms cannot be relied upon if they say something different.
Cross-platform context
See how other platforms handle Governing Law and English Language Supremacy and similar clauses.
Compare across platforms →Non-English-speaking customers who rely on translated versions of Revolut's terms could be bound by English-language provisions they did not fully understand, which may disadvantage non-native English speakers in disputes.
(1) REGULATORY FRAMEWORK: Language supremacy clauses in consumer financial contracts may engage state consumer protection requirements for disclosures in languages other than English where a significant portion of customers are non-English-speaking. California Financial Code §§1632 and 22174 require certain financial contracts negotiated in Spanish to be provided in Spanish. FTC guidance on deceptive practices may apply where translated materials create material misunderstandings. (2)
Compliance intelligence locked
Regulatory citations, enforcement risk, and due diligence action items.
Watcher: regulatory citations. Professional: full compliance memo.