A father and son who used superglue to patch up “horrific” injuries to a dog wounded in a fox hunt have been banned from keeping animals.

Robert and Jack Mills used the strong commercial adhesive in a botched DIY effort to put the terrier's lip back together after it was maimed during the illegal chase.

It was one of two dogs discovered with shocking injuries at their home in Elham, near Canterbury.

The other, a lurcher, had extensive scars across its face, a large part of its tongue missing and a weeping nailbed on one of its paws.

Robert, 66, and Jack, 22, had allowed the animals to suffer without seeking proper treatment for their injuries.

Incriminating messages - including a photo of a smiling Jack posing with a dead fox - were found during examinations of their mobile photos.

Both men appeared before Folkestone magistrates on Wednesday, with each pleading guilty to two counts of causing unnecessary suffering to an animal.

The court was told police executed a warrant at their home on January 18 this year as part of an RSPCA investigation known as Operation Aurora.

Officers found five dogs in an outbuilding kept in individual kennels with “inadequate bedding”.

Two of them - a lurcher called Rose and a Patterdale terrier called Fudge - were seized.

Recounting the notes of an expert veterinarian who examined the animals, prosecutor Janet Patel told magistrates: “There was damage to the skin of Rose’s lower jaw with the site of a deep tear or cut visible on the lower jaw and a loss of the lip margin contiguity.

“A significant amount of the tongue had been lost in a surgical or traumatic incident. The lesions are consistent with those that could be received in a fight between this dog and a large mammal such as a dog, fox, or badger.”

The vet added that a nail was missing on Rose’s left paw, oozing fluid and causing clear pain to the dog.

Fudge was found to have suffered significant damage to his face and head, and was missing a number of front teeth.

“The person caring for Fudge cut off some tissue, used commercial superglue to try and repair degloved tissue on her face and did not administer any pain medication,” the prosecutor added.

Messages shared between Robert and Jack - both bricklayers - described the dogs being used to hunt foxes.

Records from their phones indicated Fudge was caused harm in November 2021.

The vet added: “The entries, dated 16.11.2021, lead me to believe that Fudge was involved in a fight with a mammal such as a fox, large dog, or badger.

“The use of the word ‘hangin’ implies the lower jaw has been degloved to some extent, leaving the tissue literally hanging. There are two more statements. Firstly, that super glue has been used to try and put it back together and secondly that some of the flesh has been cut away.”

This referred to a message, containing a typo, which said: “I just cut a bit of.”

The vet continued: “To advise the court in this matter I am forming my opinion on the basis that the person caring for Fudge cut off some tissue, used commercial super glue to try and repair the degloved tissue and did not administer any medication.”

Another mobile phone message discovered by officers read: “Had any joy with the fox?”

A picture of a dead fox was also shared with the words: “Went out this morning, Fudge killed it.”

Ms Patel added: “That is the language of both Jack and Robert tracking and killing foxes, and it is not them flushing a fox out so that it can be killed humanely with a pistol.

“Both Jack and Robert Mills have shown deliberate disregard for the welfare of animals by placing them in situations where they sustained these horrific injuries.”

When questioned by police, Robert said that the dogs’ facial injuries had occurred when Rose and Fudge encountered a badger in the garden and that both dogs had been attacked by a rabbit.

But his son contradicted that claim in an interview, saying that neither dog had ever come across a badger.

Mitigating, solicitor Sam Harkness told the bench both men were remorseful.

“Mr Mills says he has owned dogs all his life. He deeply regrets his actions and Mr Mills Junior says this is a steep learning curve,” said Mr Harkness.

“They are both devastated that they have been involved in these proceedings, but they have cooperated.”

The charges related specifically to Fudge’s facial injury and the wound to Rose’s foot, which was established to have been sustained in the days before the police visit in January this year.

During a discussion about the prospect of both defendants being banned from keeping any animals, the pair were seen intensely shaking their heads.

After lengthy deliberations, chairwoman of the bench Patricia Light handed down a ranging list of punishments.

“For these offences we have come to the decision that they have broken the custody threshold because there is more than one dog with deliberate suffering,” she said.

“The fact that you have access to a vet and financial means to pay for treatment and yet still did not seek treatment shows deliberate disregard for the welfare of the animals.

“For each of you we are imposing 23 weeks custody, suspended for two years

“You will also each complete 150 hours of unpaid work and we are ordering that you both pay £500 pounds in costs and a £154 surcharge each.”

“We are also granting a deprivation order for Fudge and Rose and the RSPCA will seize your other dogs.

“We are also granting a disqualification order for both of you in relation to owning, keeping, or participating in controlling or transporting any animals for five years, no application may be made to appeal this for two years.”

Rose and Fudge, who have remained with the RSPCA since January, will be rehomed.

The defendants’ other three dogs will be seized within 14 days, with magistrates also giving them two weeks to rehome a number of chickens and ferrets.