Which doctrine holds that an injured party may only sue under a contractual claim for economic injuries arising from a contract?

The Economic Loss Doctrine is pivotal in understanding the boundaries between tort claims and contractual claims, particularly in the context of economic injuries. This doctrine asserts that when a party experiences purely economic losses as a result of another party's actions, those losses are typically confined to claims that arise from a contractual relationship. In essence, if a party is harmed financially due to the failure to provide a promised service or deliver a product as agreed in a contract, they must resolve this issue through contract law rather than through tort law.

The doctrine is particularly important in design and construction industries, where many injuries and losses relate to design flaws or construction defects. Under this doctrine, if the losses are solely economic and do not involve any physical injury to a person or property, the injured party cannot pursue a tort remedy, such as negligence. Instead, they must rely on the contractual agreements that govern their relationship with the other party.

The other options represent different legal principles but do not specifically address the limitation on claims for purely economic losses as the Economic Loss Doctrine does. Understanding this doctrine is essential for professionals in the field to navigate legal claims correctly and to ensure they are pursuing the appropriate legal avenues for recovery of economic injuries.