Ann: Information for Shareholders on Voluntary Administration, page-105

You're right, and the opposing position has precedent:

The applications before the Court raised a number of significant legal issues including what steps an administrator must take in satisfying himself/herself of the bona fides nature of the resolution regarding appointment and whether or not ASIC has standing to seek a declaration that any such appointment is invalid.ASIC submitted that the Company’s Board could not have formed a concluded opinion about the Company’s lack of solvency and did not genuinely hold the opinion required under section 436A of the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth) that the Company was insolvent or likely to become insolvent at some time in the future. Rather, according to ASIC, the Board appointed the administrators because of the dysfunction in the Company and as such, should have sought relief from the Court for the appointment of a provisional liquidator.The Court found that the former administrators’ appointment was valid. In doing so, it rejected ASIC’s arguments that the decision of the board was not bona fide and made for an ulterior purpose. Rather, the Board had obtained advice and could assess the likely insolvency of the Company on the information that was available to it on 4 May 2015, particularly in circumstances where the provisional liquidator’s report supported the conclusion of the Board.