The resignation of Justin Gleeson is unprecedented in the 100-year history of the federal solicitor-general. Never before has the nation seen such acrimony between the attorney-general and solicitor-general, Australia's first and second law offices respectively. Nor has the relationship become so poisonous that trust and confidence has evaporated. In these extraordinary circumstances, one of them had to resign.

The public stoush has damaged Attorney-General George Brandis and the office of solicitor-general. Labor no doubt will continue to call for Brandis' resignation on the basis that he, and not Gleeson, should have departed. It is likely though that the resignation will relieve the pressure, and enable Brandis to survive.

Brandis' longer-term future is less certain. The battle with his solicitor-general, along with his dysfunctional relationship with Australian Human Rights Commission president Gillian Triggs, presents a worrying pattern. It portrays a minister unable to work appropriately with independent officeholders within his portfolio. This is damaging for any minister, but especially for an attorney-general expected to be the defender of such offices.

Gleeson's resignation also creates an additional set of problems. Every government needs a strong and effective solicitor-general. The officeholder represents the Commonwealth in international tribunals and the High Court, and advises on the most contentious and difficult legal issues. Such advice is crucial for ensuring that policies and programs stay within the ambit of the law.