In Aas v. Superior Court (2000) 24 Cal.4th 627, the California Supreme Court concluded that certain homeowners could not recover damages in negligence from the developer, contractor or subcontractors who built their homes, for existing construction defects that had not yet caused either property damage or personal injury. There, the court declined to give a broad interpretation of this statement found J'Aire Corp. v. Gregory (1979) 24 Cal.3d 799: "'Where the risk of harm is foreseeable, . . . an injury to the plaintiff's economic interests should not go uncompensated merely because it was unaccompanied by any injury to his person or property." (Aas, supra, 24 Cal.4th 627, 645.) The Court held: "A person may not ordinarily recover in tort for the breach of duties that merely restate contractual obligations. Instead, '"courts will generally enforce the breach of a contractual promise through contract law, except when the actions that constitute the breach violate a social policy that merits the imposition of tort remedies."' The Court recently rejected the argument that the negligent performance of a construction contract, without more, justifies an award of tort damages. In so doing, however, we reiterated that conduct amounting to a breach of contract becomes tortious when it also violates a duty independent of the contract arising from principles of tort law." (Aas, supra, 24 Cal.4th 627, 643.)