Dividend Solvency Warnings: Documentation vs Outcome

The CII CF8 syllabus establishes that corporate directors must prioritize the solvency test over personal interests, yet the practical application of the business judgment rule is hard to predict during exam scenarios. If a director authorizes a dividend despite receiving an internal audit warning that suggests the solvency position is questionable at that moment, does the subsequent failure to pay the dividend prove they reasonably believed they were safe at the time? I am struggling to see if the legal liability is dictated solely by the documentation trail or if the subsequent outcome of the dividend repayment carries any weight in the examiner's model answers.