G.R. No. 172342 7 of 11 http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2009/july2009/172342.htm definite period terminates by its own terms at the end of such period. 72 of the Saudi Labor Law is also of similar import. It reads: [24] As it is, Article A labor contract concluded for a specified period shall terminate upon the expiry of its term. If both parties continue to enforce the contract, thereafter, it shall be considered [25] renewed for an unspecified period. Regarding respondents claim that he was offered US$12,640.33 as longevity pay before he returned to the Philippines on May 1, 1999, we find that he was not candid on this particular point. His categorical assertion about the offer being engrained in his mind such that he reconstructed the computation and arrived at the computation exactly the same with the amount he was previously offered is not only beyond belief. Such assertion is also a stark departure from his July 6, 1999 letter to MMG where he could only express his hope that he was entitled to a long service award and where he never mentioned the supposed previous offer. Moreover, respondents claim that his monthly compensation is [26] SR10,248.92 is belied by the payroll which shows that he receives SR5,438 per month. We therefore emphasize that such payroll should have prompted the lower tribunals to examine closely respondents computation of his supposed longevity pay before adopting that computation as their own. On the matter of prescription, however, we cannot agree with petitioner that respondents action has prescribed under Article 13 of the Saudi Labor Law. What applies is Article 291 of our Labor Code which reads: ART. 291. Money claims. All money claims arising from employer-employee relations accruing during the effectivity of this Code shall be filed within three (3) years from the time the cause of action accrued; otherwise they shall be forever barred. xxxx [27] In Cadalin v. POEAs Administrator, we held that Article 291 covers all money claims from employer-employee relationship and is broader in scope than claims arising from a specific law. It is not limited to money claims recoverable under the Labor Code, [28] but applies also to claims of overseas contract workers. The following ruling in Cadalin v. POEAs Administrator is instructive: First to be determined is whether it is the Bahrain law on prescription of action based on the Amiri Decree No. 23 of 1976 or a Philippine law on prescription that shall be 1/28/2016 11:55 AM