How have the courts dealt with disputes in the Torrens system?

They referred to the case Flello v. Baird, 172 D.L.R. (4th) 741, 122 B.C.A.C. 96, 200 W.A.C. 96, 67 B.C.L.R. (3d) 293, 1999 BCCA 244 was an appeal from the decision of the trial judge to resolve a disputed boundary between two lots in a subdivision plan. The issues of the boundaries and the correctness of the plan had been outstanding for approximately ninety years. There was not sufficient survey evidence to establish what the actual surveyed lots were. It was agreed that the plan did not represent the survey and that there were errors. The surveyors were unable to agree as to the true boundaries. The owner of lot 29 had a dispute with the owner of lot 28 and in order to support his arguments with the owner of lot 28, he encouraged the owner of lot 30 to rely on a survey and build his house accordingly. Subsequently, the owner of lot 29 purchased lot 28 and then reversed his position, arguing that the survey he had encouraged the lot 30 owner to rely on was incorrect. The court found that this did not create a problem with the Torrens system because the boundaries could not be determined. They were not simply unknown, they were unascertainable and therefore the court could apply the doctrine of proprietary estoppel against the owner of lot 29, and vested the disputed piece of property in the owners of lot 30.