英语翻译The new TBT Agreement builds upon the old Standards Code

英语翻译
The new TBT Agreement builds upon the old Standards Code,making it a more effective tool for preventing technical regulations,standards and conformity assessment procedures from being used as a means of arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination between countries where the same conditions prevail or a disguised restriction on international trade.
The most significant feature of the new TBT Agreement is that the new dispute settlement mechanism under the Dispute Settlement Understanding with enhanced automaticity and stronger enforcement is applicable to it.5 One might question then why there has been so few disputes involving technical barriers to trade adjudicated under the DSU.This presents a stark contrast with the Agreement on the Application of
Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement).The SPS Agreement,which was newly negotiated in the Uruguay Round as a companion to the TBT Agreement,has been invoked in a number of controversial disputes,including the famous Hormones Case.
This is not to say that there has been no complaint where the TBT Agreement was formally invoked.Starting with the Gasoline case7,the very first case to reach the Appellate stage,a number of complaining parties alleged violations of the TBT Agreement as part of their claims.However,to date,there has been no case where a dispute settlement panel found violation of the TBT Agreement.In many cases,parties reached a mutually agreed solution before the panel was established or even when it was established,before it made a definitive ruling on TBT issues.In other cases,panels declined to rule on TBT issues for the sake of judicial economy.
Most recently,Canada alleged violation of the TBT Agreement in its complaint against the European Communities on asbestos.Again,the panel avoided a ruling on the TBT Agreement arguing that a general ban on asbestos was not a “technical regulation” within the meaning of the TBT Agreement.9 Although this part of the panel’s finding was reversed by the Appellate Body,which found that the measure,viewed as an integrated whole,constituted a “technical regulation” under the TBT Agreement,the Appellate Body declined from examining Canada’s specific claims regarding the violation of the TBT Agreement due to the lack of adequate factual basis.
However,the fact that there have been no violation findings on the TBT Agreement does not diminish its utility.As Thorn and Carlson argue,“the most important provisions of the TBT Agreement are those relating to procedural requirements,and the Agreement’s principal (not insignificant) contribution to the international trading system has been to promote transparency and information exchange”.

绝对人工翻译,尽量做到了专业词汇的专业翻译.
新的TBT(Technical Barrier to Trade:技术性贸易壁垒)协议以老的标准法典为基础,这使得它（TBT协议）成为更有效的工具,以阻止滥用技术规定、标准和标准符合评估过程,避免使它们在对待情况基本相同的国家时成为一种武断的或者无理的歧视,或者成为限制国际贸易的借口.
TBT协议最重要的特点是：“争端解决不成文规定（DSU）”现在有了更高的自动性和更强的强制力,在此之下,现在有了针对TBT协议的争端解决机制.
5 于是有人可能会质疑为什么只有那么少的和技术性贸易壁垒有关的争端是基于DSU裁定的.这和“卫生与植物检疫办法的应用协议（SPS协议）”形成极大的反差.SPS协议是在乌拉圭回合（WTO谈判的一个阶段,译者注）作为TBT协议的套件之一新协商通过的,它已经多次在有争议的争端中被引用,其中包括著名的“荷尔蒙案”.这并不是说不存在正式引用TBT协议的申诉.从“汽油案”——第一个进行到上诉阶段的案子——开始,就有许多原告方将他们声称的违反TBT协议的行为作为诉状的一部分.然而,迄今为止,争端解决陪审团尚未在任何一个案子里做出违反TBT协议的裁决.在很多案件里,往往在陪审团成立之前,或者已经成立但是还未就TBT问题做出最终裁决的时候,争议各方就已经达成了各方同意的解决方案.在其他一些案件中,陪审团则因为审判的经济性原因（即：做出审判要花费太多的资源,如金钱）拒绝对TBT问题做出裁决.
最近,加拿大在其对欧洲共同市场关于石棉的控告中声称（欧洲共同市场）违反了TBT协议.又一次,陪审团避免了根据TBT协议进行仲裁——他们称对石棉全面禁用不是一个TBT协议范围内的“技术性法规”.
9 尽管陪审团的这部分判决被上诉机构推翻了——上诉机构发现这个措施从整体上来看构成了TBT协议所说的“技术性法规”——上诉机构仍然拒绝就加拿大的针对违反TBT协议的这一特定主张进行讯问,理由是缺乏足够的事实依据.
尽管如此,这一事实——从来没有关于违反TBT协议的裁决——并不能降低TBT协议的效用.就像 Thorn（索恩） 和Carlson（卡尔森）所说的那样：“TBT协议中最重要的条款是那些和程序上的要求有关的规定,而且这个协议对国际贸易体系的首要贡献（并非没有意义）是提高了透明度和信息交流.”