Meg, Jo, Beth and Amy were four friends who decided to set up a company called Little Women Pte Ltd ("LW"). Each of them held 10,000 shares in LW. They were also directors of LW. The four friends also entered in a shareholders' agreement with each other. Under he terms of the shareholders' agreement, they agreed that each of them, as shareholders of the company, would not receive dividends from LW but would instead be paid directors'fees.

Sometime later, Meg, Jo and Beth had an argument with Amy. By an ordinary resolution and in accordance with the provisions of LW's constitution, they removed Amy as a director of LW. Meg, Jo and Beth further decided against declaring dividends 4 years in a row, even though the company was doing exceptionally well. Their argument was that they wanted to retain the earnings for expansion of the company's business. However, since the directors consistently met their performance targets, the members in general meeting approved the payment of generous performance bonuses to the 3 directors. The company also allowed the directors to have the use of a company car each, with all petrol fully paid for by the company. The directors were also allowed to fly "first class" whenever they travelled for business. On several occasions, the 3 ladies even brought their families with them on their work trips and the flights and accommodation were all paid by LW.

Amy also noticed that her opinion seemed to be disregarded during the general meetings. Amy started to become discontented and felt increasingly being taken advantage of.

(a) Advise Amy whether she might have any course of action against LW and Meg, Jo and Beth. Please cite relevant statutory provisions and cases in your answer.

(b) Explain how a statutory derivative action can be taken out in Singapore.

(c) Advise Amy on FOUR (4) orders that the court may make under S.216 of the Companies Act.