allmänna villkor

19:55 Dec 9, 2015 

I am not sure that is so true, but interesting nonetheless.

About "payment terms" - yes, it is not 'terms and conditions of payment' as that has an entirely different meaning, and also is an expression that is (almost) never used.

19:23 Dec 9, 2015 

That when English went from Ango-saxon to using French (why?), the legal profession resolved any uncertainties by using both the old and new terms. As we lawyers might say they used operation CYA (figure it) ... that is, say it every way you can just to make sure. But these two 'terms' are listed as being French and Latin in origin... But yes both 'shall' be used or you're not using common usage...

'Terms of payment' is also standard...or Payment terms.

No machine translations here, thank you!

18:05 Dec 9, 2015 

I would have used "payment terms" in that situation. "Terms of payment" is the sort of verbosity practiced by lawyers with mush for brains. No one over here would have used "terms and conditions of payment".

17:58 Dec 9, 2015 

Perhaps our American lawyers can explain why a US Attorney in London once objected to my translation of 'terms and conditions of payment' for betalningsvillkor within such allmänna villkor and insisted on terms of payment.

17:03 Dec 9, 2015 

Thank you Charles and Charles Ek for explaining this. "Legal doublet", interesting. I wonder if there is something similar in Swedish or Norwegian ...

16:45 Dec 9, 2015 

maybe I should mention that there is even a legal term for it: A "legal doublet"

16:45 Dec 9, 2015 

It's legal language, why two terms are used to say what could be expressed by one.

There is a whole history behind it, and many not versed in legal language find it unnecessary, or even annoying. But one term modifies the other, so that makes it clearer.

Actually that's not why.
It is that it is legal language, like a trademark.

Like what does "appropriate and proper" mean; I mean, aren't they the same?

15:41 Dec 9, 2015 

There isn't usually any practical difference. Sometimes "terms" and "conditions" are distinct, as in insurance contracts. Sometimes "conditions" identify contractual clauses that "suspend, rescind, or modify the principal obligation", per Black's Law Dictionary. It would be rare, I think, to see distinct headings for "Terms" and "Conditions" in a contract these days (other than an insurance policy). The phrase "terms and conditions" is largely a holdover but still current.

15:31 Dec 9, 2015 

"Terms" means "villkor" and "conditions" means "villkor", so translating from English to Swedish, it would read "villkor och villkor". What exactly is the difference between "terms" and "conditions"?

15:01 Dec 9, 2015 

Thanks guys!

14:53 Dec 9, 2015 

Ditto here in the U.S. and in translations of various standard Swedish contract forms.

14:46 Dec 9, 2015 

UK is always t&c