Leyton Orient have hit out at the High Court decision denying them the right to challenge West Ham's tenancy of the Olympic Stadium.
The League One club want a groundshare at the stadium, which is close to their current Brisbane Road home, and claimed the London Legacy Development Corporation was wrong to award sole tenancy to the Premier League Hammers.
Lawyers representing Orient asked a High Court judge to give the club the go-ahead to pursue a judicial review of the Corporation's decision.
But Mr Justice Lewis, who also heard arguments from lawyers representing the LLDC and West Ham, refused their request, leaving Orient to consider their next course of action .
In a statement on their official website, Orient said: "We feel a real sense of injustice at today's decision.
"(West Ham vice-chairman) Karren Brady told the House of Lords only a few weeks ago that West Ham United had no objection to a ground share with Leyton Orient, but West Ham United's barrister today claimed that to groundshare would adversely affect the club because the Olympic Stadium is "part of the brand".
"Our real concern is the lack of transparency that has been shown throughout the process by a public body.
"It is deeply disappointing that both the Court and the LLDC have made decisions based only on financial considerations, when the purpose of the Stadium's legacy was regeneration of the area with a community focus.
"We believe that the LLDC exercised its discretion to favour West Ham United, no doubt under pressure from West Ham United to make them sole football tenants for the benefit of their "brand".
"Delivering a new brand to West Ham United was not the intended purpose of the Olympic Stadium, and we now have to look to the House of Lords to find a common sense solution for Olympic legacy and local community.
"As the judge noted, Leyton Orient are flying high in League One. We will enjoy our current on-pitch success whilst we contemplate how to proceed in the best interests of the club."