What is the test for a plaintiff to obtain damages for a fraudulent misrepresentation in the form of a document?

As I see it, while the actual damages or detriment may be difficult to quantify, there is a strong case of a clear risk to the plaintiff's economic interest founding its action in fraud and justifying some form of relief. The evidence in this case is unlike that in Lee v. Li, as in that case there was a finding that no one had acted on the document said to constitute the fraudulent misrepresentation, and hence the tort was anticipatory only. Here the plaintiff has acted on the misrepresentation by activating the subscriptions at issue.