The court found that the applicant had satisfied the requirement of bringing the application without undue delay. On substantial loss, the applicant's apprehension that the respondents may not be able to refund the decretal sum if the appeal succeeds was considered, especially as the respondents did not address their financial ability. However, the bank guarantee offered as security was found insufficient due to lack of clarity on the applicant's relationship with the issuer. To balance the interests of both parties, the court ordered that half of the decretal sum be paid to the respondents and the other half be deposited in a joint interest-earning account operated by the parties' advocates, as a condition for stay of execution pending appeal. Failure to comply would result in automatic lapse of the stay.