The basic objective of this research is to examine whether or not court annexed ADR can serve as effective reform measure to improve delay, excessive cost, unfairness, unpredictability and inaccessibility of judicial dispute resolution process in Ethiopia. To achieve this objective, the researcher utilized primary, secondary and tertiary data sources. The primary data sources were collected from different legal instruments, interviews, and observations. Secondary data sources utilized in this study were case analysis, books, journals, articles, unpublished material, reports, news papers, and cyber sources. Accordingly, the interpretations and logical analysis of collected data revealed that court annexed ADR can successfully settle specific types of civil disputes initiated to court thereby reduces courtsâ€™ case load. Consequent to this reduced backlog litigation process, in turn, holds improved capacity to resolve other civil cases with (in) reasonable time, cost and improved fairness. Beside, availabilities of ADR in court enable disputants to choose and access dispute resolution methods of their interest. In addition, the judiciary due to numerous advantage of ADR can provide for disputants a mechanism that resolve specific types of disputes with /in reasonable time, least cost, and improved fairness. Further, it is found difficult to succeed with this reform measure without enactment of effective regulatory frame work. On the other hand, incomprehensive regulation, overregulation, lack of adequate awareness and poor administrative systems are found as among potential challenges for successful implementation of this program in Ethiopia. Therefore, this study recommended the country to introduce court annexed ADR. This should be through enactment of proper and comprehensive regulatory framework. Moreover, this formal introduction of the program