The use of artificial intelligence (AI) in the field of law has generated many hopes. Some have seen it as a way of relieving courts’ congestion, facilitating investigations, and making sentences for certain offences more consistent—and therefore fairer. But while it is true that the work of investigators and judges can be facilitated by these tools, particularly in terms of finding evidence during the investigative process, or preparing legal summaries, the panorama of current uses is far from rosy, as it often clashes with the reality of field usage and raises serious questions regarding human rights. This chapter will use the Robodebt Case to explore some of the problems with introducing automation into legal systems with little human oversight. AI—especially if it is poorly designed—has biases in its data and learning pathways which need to be corrected. The infrastructures that carry these tools may fail, introducing novel bias. All these elements are poorly understood by the legal world and can lead to misuse. In this context, there is a need to identify both the users of AI in the area of law and the uses made of it, as well as a need for transparency, the rules and contours of which have yet to be established.