Not to toot my own horn, but I am becoming a bit of a specialist on these applications. The original case that caused the problems was Potts v. McCann.
http://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abqb/doc...02abqb734.html (That is the change in practice I was referring to in my earlier post)
There have been a few decisions such as the one mentioned that have further expanded on Potts, but that was the problem case. Luckily, over the past few years, the practice in private chambers has clarified a little. In some cases, with a strong affidavit and good advocacy, the Master won't require every single party who has the instrument registered to be served. In one case we had one in Inverness registered against about 250 homes, and I ended up having to serve 38 altogether. But it is definitely a case by case thing.
Really though, the hope would be that there isn't anything on title, and a quick review can set your mind at ease or let you know that you have a challenge ahead.