Question I {25 marks! XiaoGongShi Pte Ltd {EFL} was a small company incorporated in Singapore. It was incorporated on I Apr 24313 and its memorandum and articles of association had not been amended since its incorporation. KPL also had an objects clause within its memorandum which stated that the company's object was to carry on the business of processing, producing, mixing. packing. manufacturing, importing, exporting, buying, selling, trading and dealing with all types of food and beverage items including but not limited to processed foods, health foods, food products, fast foods, poultry, seafood, dairy items, health and diet drinks. bakery products and confectionery items in and outside Singapore. There were no other objects. The business had been doing well. In view of the demand for delivery services during the CDVID 1 9 restrictions. the directors ofXPL decided to boost the business bybuying over the business of delivery service provider Mahlvlahlvloove {3M}. A contract was entered into by XPL to purchase 3M's business at a price of $3million. Several shareholders of XPL were completely against the idea ofexpanding into delivery service because it was outside the scope of the company's objects clause. {a} 1|Ip'vlhat is the status ofthe memorandum and articles of association of XPL since the Companies {Amendment} Act El] 14 became operative? (6 marks} {b} Advise the board of NFL if the contract to buy over 3M's business could be challenged on the ground that it Was outside the company's objects clause. In your answler, explain to the board how the dissenting shareholders may prevent the contemplated purchase of 3l'v'l's business. {L2 marks] (c) EFL wanted to amend its objects clause. Advise the board ofXPL on what they must do according to the Companies Act. {T marks] Support your answers with relevant statutory provisions and case law [if any}