It is an unusual dispute between the top two law officers of the Commonwealth.
Federal Attorney-General George Brandis is now facing calls to step down after the second-ranking law officer in the land, Solicitor-General Justin Gleeson, publicly criticised him.
Mr Gleeson claims Senator Brandis did not consult him on key laws.
But the dispute also concerns a legally binding directive, or official instruction, about who can contact the Solicitor-General directly for legal advice.
Senator Brandis issued a directive that no-one in government, including the prime minister, could seek Mr Gleeson's advice without Senator Brandis's permission.
Senator Brandis told the Senate in September that Mr Gleeson had been consulted about the instruction during a meeting in November 2015.
He has repeated that claim to the ABC.
"We discussed section 12B of the Law Officers Act, as the notes of the meeting show, and I invited the Solicitor-General to put to me in writing what he proposed. And in March of this year, he did so, and I took that into account as well."
But in a submission to a Senate inquiry, Mr Gleeson disputed that version of events.
He wrote, "At no time at that meeting did the Attorney-General indicate he was considering issuing a legally binding direction concerning the performance of the functions of the Solicitor-General."
Section 12B of the Law Officers Act says the Solicitor-General's role is "to furnish his or her opinion to the Attorney-General on questions of law referred to him or her by the Attorney-General."
Senator Brandis says he was simply reinforcing the law.
"There is no other mode under the law for the Solicitor-General to provide advice on questions of law than by reference to the Attorney-General, by being referred that question by the Attorney-General. Now, the practice had developed lazily across government over some years that there were many matters that were being referred to the Solicitor-General that were not of high constitutional importance, and many departments and agencies were acting in evident ignorance of the requirements of section 12B of the Law Officers Act. And that was what Mr Gleeson, in effect, was complaining about. So, what we discussed at some length was how we would go about regularising the practice."
In his submission, Mr Gleeson also said he was not consulted about the final draft of the counter-terrorism laws stripping dual nationals of their Australian citizenship.
He took issue with Senator Brandis telling parliament Mr Gleeson had advised there was a good chance the law would withstand a High Court challenge.
Senator Brandis, however, says Mr Gleeson was consulted at times.
"It was an issue, to be blunt, on which the Cabinet was divided, between, on the one hand, me and (Malcolm) Turnbull and Julie Bishop and others and, on the other hand, the then prime minister, (Tony) Abbott, and (Peter) Dutton, who was then the responsible minister, as to how extensive the power of executive detention should be, and whether that power should be exercisable over dual citizens or people who were only Australian citizens. And there were many, many chapters to this political controversy, during the course of which Mr Gleeson was involved from time to time."
But Opposition legal-affairs spokesman Mark Dreyfus has told the ABC the integrity of Senator Brandis is now in question.
"Senator Brandis should resign. It's a disgraceful act that he's engaged in here. In his formal explanatory statement, he said to the Senate, 'I consulted with the Solicitor-General.' And he didn't! And the Solicitor-General has made this clear in his submission to the inquiry that's now looking into this."
Senator Brandis has told Sky News he regards the whole affair as a purely administrative issue that
