Commit the funds before applying, but structure the commitment so a refusal has a defined consequence. Escrow with release conditions tied to the outcome is the usual mechanism. Applying before anything is committed produces a weak file; closing unconditionally before applying leaves the buyers holding a business they may not be able to run.
Irrevocable enough to count, structured enough to survive a refusal
The sequencing problem is genuine and it has a standard solution. The category requires capital irrevocably committed, so an application filed while the money is still in a Canadian account rarely succeeds. At the same time, a buyer who completes an unconditional purchase and is then refused owns a business in a country where they cannot work.
Escrow bridges the two: the funds leave the buyers' control and sit with a third party under written instructions, so they are committed, while a defined release or return condition addresses the refusal scenario. That condition should be drafted narrowly and by the buyers' own counsel, since a broadly drafted escape clause can undermine the commitment the application depends on. Around that, plan the operational calendar: the seller's staff need to know when the transition happens, licences must be transferred or reapplied for, and insurance must be in place at closing.
Where either spouse must remain in Erin to wind down the Canadian operation, decide who applies first.