Is there any case law where damages for conspiracy where the purpose is to undermine contractual rights are determined to be at large?

The plaintiffs also argue here that damages for conspiracy where the purpose is to undermine contractual rights should be considered to be “at large” and, thus, capable of being inferred even though a precise figure is incapable of being specifically proven. They urge the court, as was stated in Jones v. Fabbi, that “the whole process of assessing damages where they are ‘at large’ is essentially a matter of impression and not addition.”[82] I find this to be a helpful principle in the unusual circumstances of this case. It is helpful because it is inevitable with the deficiencies that I have found to have been present in the evidence that the calculation of damages cannot be a result of applying precise principles of measurement and must necessarily be one flowing from my impression of the evidence as a whole and certain assumptions that I have been required to make in the circumstances.